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

February 22, 2016

41st Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2016-Feb-22 (PDF)

L138 - Mon 22 Feb 2016 / Lun 22 fév 2016

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Monday 22 February 2016 Lundi 22 février 2016

Introduction of member for Whitby–Oshawa

Introduction of Visitors

Oral Questions

Energy policies

Energy policies

Hospital funding

Education funding

Privatization of public assets

Education funding

Beverage alcohol sales

Hydro rates

Climate change

Job creation

Property taxation

Automobile insurance

First responders

Wind turbines

Introduction of Visitors

Order of business

Members’ Statements

Lennox and Addington Interval House

Coldest Night of the Year

Singh Khalsa Sewa Club

Bernard Cameron

Coldest Night of the Year

International Mother Language Day

Wiarton Willie Festival

Youth Bocce Canada

Coldest Night of the Year

Bernard Cameron

Introduction of Bills

Licensed Home Inspectors Act, 2016 / Loi de 2016 sur les inspecteurs d’habitations titulaires d’un permis

Supply Act, 2016 / Loi de crédits de 2016

Petitions

Privatization of public assets

Autism treatment

Lung disease

Hydro rates

Tenant protection

Electronic bikes

Hydro rates

Partner Assault Response Program

Lung disease

Employment supports

Mental health and addiction services

Orders of the Day

Supporting Ontario’s First Responders Act (Posttraumatic Stress Disorder), 2016 / Loi de 2016 d’appui aux premiers intervenants de l’Ontario (état de stress post-traumatique)

The House met at 1030.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Good morning. Please join me in prayer.

Prayers.

Introduction of member for Whitby–Oshawa

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): I beg to inform the House that the Clerk from the Chief Electoral Officer and laid upon the table a certificate of the by-election in the electoral district of Whitby–Oshawa.

The Clerk of the Assembly (Ms. Deborah Deller): This is a letter addressed to Deborah Deller, Clerk of the Legislative Assembly, and it reads as follows:

“A writ of election dated the 13th day of January, 2016, was issued by the Honourable Lieutenant Governor of the province of Ontario, and was addressed to William Paul Jones, returning officer for the electoral district of Whitby–Oshawa, for the election of a member to represent the said electoral district of Whitby–Oshawa in the Legislative Assembly of this province in the room of Christine Elliott who, since her election as representative of the said electoral district of Whitby–Oshawa, has resigned her seat.

This is to certify that, a poll having been granted and held in Whitby–Oshawa on the 11th day of February, 2016, Lorne Coe has been returned as duly elected as appears by the return of the said writ of election dated the 13th day of February, 2016, which is now lodged of record in my office.”

It is signed “Greg Essensa, Chief Electoral Officer” and dated “Toronto, February 22, 2016.”

Mr. Coe was escorted into the House by Mr. Brown and Mr. Wilson.

Mr. Patrick Brown: Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present to you and to the House Mr. Lorne Coe, member-elect for the electoral district of Whitby–Oshawa, who has taken the oath and signed the roll and is now ready to take his seat in the House.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Let the honourable member take his seat.

Applause.

Introduction of Visitors

Mrs. Lisa Gretzky: This morning I would like to welcome to the Legislature members of Fix Our Schools and their supporting trustees, individuals and other organizations. We have Krista Wylie, Carolyn Ferns, Spencer Higdon-McGreal, Danielle Chandler, Julian Heller, Victoria Bitto, Abigail Doris, Geoffrey Feldman, Dennis Hastings, Jean-Francois L’Heureux, Claude-Reno D’Aigle, Jennifer Arp, Pamela Gough, Alexander Brown, Bill Mboutsiadis—I apologize if I said that wrong—Lauren Maiolo, Victoria Martins, Fabiana Stelzer and Ariadra Garcia.

Mr. Mike Colle: Mr. Speaker, As you know, today the Public Affairs Association of Canada is inviting all MPPs to come to room 228 from 5:30 to 7:30. With us today from the Public Affairs Association of Canada we have four very distinguished people: first of all, president John Capobianco, treasurer Stephen Andrews, marketing chair Cristina Onose and illustrious membership chair Harvey Cooper.

Ms. Cindy Forster: I’d like to welcome Jeff Koller, Matt Wayland and all of the Progressive Certified Trades Coalition, who represent about 100,000 construction workers. They’re here today for their lobby day. I welcome them to Queen’s Park.

M. Glenn Thibeault: Avec nous aujourd’hui sont des membres du conseil d’administration de l’ACFO du grand Sudbury : Denis Constantineau, le président; Marie-Eve Pépin, la vice-présidente; et Vincent Lacroix. Bienvenue à Queen’s Park.

Mr. Lorne Coe: I’d like to take this opportunity to introduce in the members’ gallery my wife and my son and daughter, as well as my campaign managers, Rob Morton and Kathy Beattie.

Ms. Peggy Sattler: I’m very pleased this morning to welcome the family of Owen Davies, who is page captain for today. His proud mother, Cheryl Davies; his dad, Rob Davies; his brothers, Bryn and Rhys Davies; and his grandmother, Borden Craddock, have all joined us in the gallery today.

Mrs. Laura Albanese: I would like to introduce Borden Craddock from the great riding of York South–Weston. She is the grandmother of page Owen Davies, who is page captain today. I would also like to welcome her family from London. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mr. Norm Miller: I’m very pleased to welcome the mayor and deputy mayor of the town of Bracebridge, who are down from ROMA/OGRA, and that’s Graydon Smith, mayor, and Rick Maloney, deputy mayor, who are in the members’ west gallery. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Also, I would like to welcome members of the Progressive Certified Trades Coalition who are at Queen’s Park meeting with MPPs, and Craig Hughson, who arranged a lot of it for them.

Mr. Taras Natyshak: I’d like to welcome some friends from the Windsor–Essex area. Barry Heeney is the assistant business manager of IBEW Local 773, and Karl Lovett is the business manager and financial secretary for Local 773. I’d like to welcome them here today to Queen’s Park.

Mr. Chris Ballard: I’d like to welcome the grade 5 class from Northern Lights Public School in Aurora to Queen’s Park this morning. Welcome.

Hon. Reza Moridi: It’s a great pleasure to welcome the progressive certified trade unions of Ontario visiting the House today. Please join me in welcoming them.

Miss Monique Taylor: I’m very pleased to welcome my dear friend from IBEW, Mr. Lorne Newick. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Hon. Bill Mauro: I heard “IBEW,” so I looked up into the gallery and I saw the local IBEW representative from Thunder Bay, Mr. Glen Drewes. I’d like to welcome Glen to the Legislature.

Mr. Mike Colle: I’d like to introduce a former colleague and a member of the Legislature, MPP Steven Gilchrist.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): I thank the member for doing that as an introduction to my introduction. I’d like to appreciate that.

In the members’ gallery is Mr. Steve Gilchrist, member for Scarborough East in the 36th and 37th Parliaments. Welcome, Steve. We’re glad you’re back with us.

Oral Questions

Energy policies

Mr. Patrick Brown: My question is for the Premier. This year’s budget is only days away, and the Ontario PC caucus is looking for a few assurances. Liberal scandals, waste and mismanagement have led to hydro bills that have skyrocketed in our province. Energy is now unaffordable, and many vulnerable seniors and families simply can’t afford their hydro bills. Therefore, this budget must include a credible plan to make energy affordable in Ontario, and any credible plan must include halting the fire sale of Hydro One.

Mr. Speaker, does the Premier appreciate that any budget without a plan for affordable energy will be viewed as a failure to all those seniors, families and businesses across Ontario struggling with the Liberal hydro mess?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Once again, let me welcome Lorne Coe to the Legislature. We look forward to working with him. Welcome, Lorne.

Mr. Speaker, in 2003, we were elected on a platform to deliver clean, modern, reliable electricity in this province, because there wasn’t clean, affordable, reliable electricity in this province. There were huge investments needed to invest. There was an artificial cap that had been put on the price of electricity that created huge problems down the road.

I would say to the Leader of the Opposition that I hope he acknowledges that the investments that have been made in our electricity system mean that it is clean, mean that it’s reliable and mean that thousands of kilometres of line have been upgraded—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Order, please. It’s coming from all sides.

Answer.

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: We did make a decision to take the whole province off coal. There’s a cost associated with that, but we have that clean, reliable power that we knew we needed.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you. Supplementary.

Mr. Patrick Brown: Again to the Premier: Let me say that “scandal, waste and mismanagement” is not code for “investments.” This government must be looking at ways to make electricity and hydro bills more affordable.

Just look at the story that I read recently about Blenheim resident Cathy Van Breda. I recently read her story in the Chatham Daily News. She is a 74-year-old widow. Her last hydro bill was $813. She said that was $500 more than what she usually pays.

Mr. Speaker, does this government understand that their scandals, mismanagement and waste mean higher hydro bills for residents like Ms. Van Breda? Will the Premier apologize to Ms. Van Breda? Will she apologize for this atrocious bill, because of her government’s incompetence on hydro?

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Be seated, please. Thank you.

Premier?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: I would hope that the member for that citizen of Ontario would make it clear to her what the programs are that would help her with her electricity bill, because we recognize that investing in our—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member from Leeds–Grenville and the member from Renfrew–Nipissing–Pembroke will come to order.

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Mr. Speaker, I have said quite clearly that there are costs associated with investing in a system that had been neglected and degraded by a previous government. Those costs have meant that we have now got a system that is reliable and clean. We are ahead of the curve in terms of a—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): I will move right to members directly. I will move to warnings. The member from Simcoe–Grey will come to order and the member from Prince Edward–Hastings will come to order.

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: I would say to the Leader of the Opposition, if he is suggesting that we should go back to coal or subsidize and create more debt, we’re not going to do that. That artificial cap that was put on by the previous government, the burning of—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member from Glengarry–Prescott–Russell just chirped one too many. I’m now moving to warnings.

You have 10 seconds.

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: We are not going back to burning coal. If that’s what the Leader of the Opposition is suggesting, we’re not going there.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Final supplementary?

Mr. Patrick Brown: Again to the Premier: The voters in Whitby–Oshawa didn’t buy that smear either. And do you know what, Mr. Speaker? It was Premier Ernie Eves who announced the phase-out of coal, so don’t try any of these diversion tactics.

The reality is that this is because of your—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Stop the clock. Just to make sure that the members understand: At any given time, you will get a warning. When it gets too loud by everybody, I’ll stop.

Finish, please.

Mr. Patrick Brown: Mr. Speaker, we’ve obviously touched a nerve. The Liberal government doesn’t want to talk. This is their fault. They must own up to it.

The Auditor General said very clearly that it is because of your mismanagement, so let’s go back to what this is about. This is about seniors across the province who can’t afford their bills because of your political interference in the energy sector.

Ms. Van Breda has done everything possible to lower her bill. She doesn’t turn the TV on until the late afternoon, she keeps no lights on during the day, she cleaned up her attic to put insulation in, and it’s still $800. Will you apologize to the seniors in this province? This is because of you. This is because of your—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Be seated, please. Thank you.

Premier?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Let’s be clear: The Leader of the Opposition is saying that we should not have invested in those transmission lines around the province, we should not have upgraded the system, we should not have continued to shut down the coal-fired plants, and we should not have a clean, renewable electricity system. The Leader of the Opposition is suggesting either that we return to burning coal or that we do as a previous Conservative government did and put an artificial cap on electricity prices, which will actually increase the cost to the people of Ontario.

I would say to the Leader of the Opposition that we have a plan. He knows full well that the broadening of the ownership of Hydro One, which will allow us to invest in infrastructure, has nothing to do with electricity prices—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): If the last episode was a test, I will pass the test, and warnings will be distributed.

New question.

Energy policies

Mr. John Yakabuski: My question is to the Premier. For years, it has been clear to us on this side of the House how damaging your government’s reckless and dangerous energy policies truly are. The phone calls to my office and my colleagues’ offices just haven’t stopped. We hear from constituents every day who are desperate for help because they can’t afford their hydro bills. Many people in Ontario don’t know how they’re going to pay this month’s bill.

Speaker, why does this government stubbornly refuse to do anything to make energy more affordable in Ontario?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: I hope that when those people call his office the member opposite is very clear with them that we do understand that there are challenges; we do understand that there was a cost associated with shutting down the coal-fired plants and there was a cost associated with making a degraded electricity system a reliable electricity system. That’s why we have removed the debt retirement charge. We have put in place the Ontario Energy and Property Tax Credit, which is targeted particularly at seniors to allow them to reduce their electricity costs.

We’ve put in place the Low-Income Energy Assistance Program. We’ve put in place the Northern Ontario Energy Credit. We’ve made it very, very clear that there are mitigating programs to deal with the cost.

The fact is, we had to have a reliable, clean energy system. That was not left by the previous government. That’s what we’ve built in Ontario.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Be seated, please. Thank you.

Supplementary?

Mr. John Yakabuski: It’s just a rolling shell game. Your former minister, George Smitherman, said that the Green Energy Act was going to cost 1% a year. That’s where the costs have gone. The auditor says that it cost $9.2 billion more than it should have. This government’s out-of-touch response is no more than just a mere Band-Aid for the gaping hole that is skyrocketing hydro bills. It’s not just families and seniors in this province who are struggling to pay them; as hydro prices rise in Ontario, our businesses become less and less competitive.

The Liberals have driven job-creating businesses right out of Ontario and into the arms of neighbouring states and provinces—job creators like the Leamington greenhouse operator who chose Delta, Ohio, over Ontario to invest $61 million in his expanding business. If this government doesn’t reverse course on damaging policies, more and more businesses will follow suit. How many more businesses have to leave Ontario before this government introduces a credible plan to make energy more affordable?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Minister of Energy.

Hon. Bob Chiarelli: Mr. Speaker, the member refers to the industrial rates or the business rates. The member must know that the Ontario price is lower than probably 25 or 30 provinces and states in the US. That’s the record.

I want to say that I appreciate very much—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member from Simcoe–Grey is warned.

Carry on.

Hon. Bob Chiarelli: Mr. Speaker, the member mentions: Going forward, what are we going to do? I appreciate that the Conservatives supported our refurbishment program, because, in the next 30 years, we’re going to put into this province electricity which will cost about 7.5 to 8 cents per kilowatt hour going into the grid, and it’ll be clean and emissions-free.

We did announce, a couple of days ago, $100 million that went into conservation that will help reduce rates. There’s much more that I’ll say in the supplementary.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Final supplementary?

Mr. John Yakabuski: Don’t try to dodge the question. The question is about prices today.

Since you were elected, hydro costs have increased by more than $1,000 a year for the average family. This government has spent the last 12 years recklessly wasting billions of dollars on cancelled gas plants, expensive green energy experiments and smart meters that were anything but smart. If they hadn’t done all that, hydro bills would be much more affordable. The Auditor General has said as much in her last report. Without the waste on cancelled gas plants and smart meters, this government wouldn’t have to resort—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The Minister of Finance is warned.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Excuse me; I’m not looking for any attention.

Mr. John Yakabuski: Without that waste, you wouldn’t have to resort to the fire sale of Hydro One.

Will this government finally do something to address skyrocketing hydro bills for ratepayers? Will Thursday’s budget, Mr. Finance Minister, include a credible plan to make energy affordable in Ontario?

Hon. Bob Chiarelli: I think there’s a lot of exaggeration coming from the other side. If you look at the average daily price for electricity, if you take the price of electricity that’s being paid in the province, the average by the residential user is $5.26 per day. That’s less than most return transit fares in the province of Ontario. Take public transit back and forth—it costs less per day than what they’re paying for electricity. Their one or two computers, one or two television sets, all their lights—all of that is $5.26 per day. It’s less than a return trip on any public transit system in Ontario.

It’s less than a one-way GO trip. It is value that people are getting, and we’re taking steps to bring it down.

Hospital funding

Ms. Andrea Horwath: I do want to begin, on behalf of Ontario’s New Democrats, by welcoming the new member for Whitby–Oshawa to the Legislature.

This is to the Premier. People expect their government to work for them and to invest in their priorities, like supporting our children’s schools and reducing wait times in our hospitals. But this government just doesn’t seem to share those priorities. For four straight budgets, the Liberals have chosen to freeze hospital funding. That’s forced hospitals to cut millions of dollars from their budgets, close beds and fire thousands of nurses who provide front-line care to patients.

People deserve to know: How much deeper does this Premier want to cut health care services that people count on in this province?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: I know that the leader of the third party actually knows that we have increased funding to health care year over year, every single year. Since 2003, hospital funding has risen from $11.3 billion to $17.3 billion, a 53% increase. Every single year more money has gone into health care. For small, rural hospitals, we’ve invested over $17 million since 2003.

So just in terms of hospital funding alone, you can see the increases that we’ve made, because we recognize how important those hospitals are to communities, how important health care is to the people of Ontario, Mr. Speaker, and you will see, as we go forward, we will continue to increase investments in health care across the province.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Ms. Andrea Horwath: In public, the Premier promised to protect health care, but behind closed doors she’s cutting the care that we all rely on. Nearly 1,200 nursing jobs have been cut since the start of 2015 alone, and hospitals say that they are now—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The Minister of Economic Development is warned.

Carry on, please.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Hospitals say that they are now at a critical turning point. Families know exactly what that means: longer wait times when our loved ones are sick, fewer nurses to provide critical care, fewer beds in our hospitals, more overcrowding and even more worry for families and loved ones.

How can this Premier keep cutting health care when she knows that those cuts are hurting Ontarians?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: I understand that it is somehow in the political interests of the third party leader to sow this kind of fear. But the reality is that I think it would be a much more productive discussion if the leader of the third party said, “You know, we recognize that you’re putting more funding into health care but here’s the plan that we would like to see in place,” because the fact is, we’re hiring more nurses.

The leader of the third party doesn’t note, as she talks about changes, that there’s hiring going on at the same time as the other changes are taking place. She doesn’t acknowledge that there are more health care workers being hired to work in the community, to work in hospitals, to work in health sciences centres. The fact is, health care needs are growing. As the population ages, changes are needed in terms of delivery. We’re making those changes. We’re increasing funding. We will continue to do that.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Be seated, please. Thank you.

Final supplementary.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Well, Speaker, what I wish is that the Premier would actually start paying attention to what’s happening to health care in Ontario. People are waiting months on end for the home care that they need. Thousands of seniors are stuck on waiting lists for long-term care in this province. The Premier’s freeze on hospital budgets—which she cannot deny; she has frozen hospital budgets four years running—has forced hospitals to cut nearly 1,200 nursing jobs since the start of 2015. That’s just the facts. That’s what this Premier needs to recognize: the facts.

But the Premier is too focused on helping private investors profit off the sale of Hydro One to even notice that health care is suffering because of her Liberal cuts.

It begs the question: How can this Premier actually think that profits for private investors are more important than patient care?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Well, I don’t. I am very focused, as is our government, on helping people to deal with the challenge of their day-to-day lives. The fact is that there have been investments in community care. That’s the side of the story that the leader of the third party omits as she talks about a partial story.

The reality is that demographics are changing. The reality is that delivery of health care is changing. We need more investment in home care, and we continue to make those investments. We continue to increase funding, and we continue to hire health care workers across the province, because we know that that kind of community care is what people need.

I look forward to discussing the budget after Thursday. I hope that the leader of the third party will then be able to comment on those further investments that we are making.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Speaker, the Premier is failing miserably because she’s actually making day-to-day life a lot worse for people.

Education funding

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My next question is for the Premier. Protecting our hospitals and our children’s schools is a priority for the people of Ontario, but the Premier just isn’t listening to parents, students and education workers. The Liberals cut $250 million from education last year. They’ve shut down nearly 100 schools in four years. Now families are worried that Thursday’s budget will bring even deeper cuts to Ontario schools.

Why is this Premier cutting education when she knows that it’s students that will pay the price?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: We’re not cutting education funding; in fact, we’re increasing education funding. We’ve increased education funding year over year. In fact, we have been doing that in the face of declining enrolment. There are fewer students in the system, but there is more funding in the system. That means that there are more resources in place for boards to deliver services.

We are seeing the results. The graduation rate in Ontario I think is at 83% or 84% after high school. When we came into office, the graduation rate in this province was 68%. Students have gotten more support, they have gotten resources that they need, and that has allowed their achievement to improve.

We will continue to work with education leaders and with parents. The Parents Reaching Out Grants were announced last week. That was a grassroots initiative that came from parents—

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you. Supplementary?

Ms. Andrea Horwath: The Liberals have already cut $250 million from education. That’s the fact. They’ve said that up to half a billion dollars could permanently be cut from schools by next year. Parents, trustees and community advocates who are here today know exactly what those Liberal cuts mean to our schools. They lead to bigger class sizes, a growing backlog of critical repairs to buildings, broken heaters in the middle of winter and even more school closures.

People want an answer from this Premier. Why is she cutting education when she should be protecting our children’s schools?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Minister of Education.

Hon. Liz Sandals: First of all, let me repeat what the Premier said: We are not cutting education. The grants for student needs were $22.5 billion a couple of years ago. They are still $22.5 billion.

Let me give you an idea of where we have been investing money. In 2014, to keep schools in a good state of repair, the ministry announced an investment of $1.25 billion for school condition improvement over three years. Just to give you an idea, Speaker, the way that grant works is that it’s actually based on the facility condition index. We look at each board and customize the grants based on what condition the schools are in that board. That’s how we distribute the funding, and I’d be happy to give you some more information in the next question.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Final supplementary.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: It’s like the Premier and the Liberals don’t actually know what’s going on in Ontario when it comes to education. They should look at their own last budget, which, on page 230, clearly states $250 million is coming out of education.

The Auditor General says that the Liberals have failed today to keep up with urgent school repairs. Here’s what that means: When old heaters break, students are forced to wear their jackets in class just to stay warm; ceilings leak in classrooms and libraries; and today, a quarter of the schools in Toronto are in critical condition and desperately need to be fixed. Yet this Premier is too focused on selling off Hydro One to even notice what’s happening in our schools.

When will this Premier start paying attention to the urgent needs of students in our classrooms and stop her Liberal cuts to education?

Hon. Liz Sandals: In addition to the school condition improvement fund I told you about, we also have the school renewal fund, which is $325 million this year. In fact, when you add up all the grants that have to do with school renewal and school retrofit, we actually spent $825 million on just that one area last year alone.

We’ve also said to the school boards that, number one, we have a $750-million school consolidation fund, and if you consolidate those schools with empty spaces, we’ll help you. We’ll help you do the renovation. We’ll help you do the repair. We’ll help you with the addition that you need. We’ve also directed the boards that if they sell a school, they must invest the money in repairing the schools they kept—

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you. A gentle reminder: I stand, you sit.

Privatization of public assets

Mr. Todd Smith: My question this morning is for the Premier. More than 80% of Ontarians oppose the sale of Hydro One. Two weeks ago, the voters of Whitby–Oshawa spoke loud and clear, sending this government a resounding message: They don’t want the sell-off to continue. They don’t want another skyrocketing hydro bill to pay for big raises at Hydro One.

Speaker, will the Premier listen to the people of Whitby–Oshawa and have her finance minister announce in the budget on Thursday that they won’t be selling off any more Hydro One shares, or will she continue to insist that she knows more than the people of Ontario?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Again, I look forward to working with the new member from Whitby–Oshawa.

Mr. Speaker, I know from having listened to people in Whitby–Oshawa that a huge concern of the people in that riding is about transportation and transportation infrastructure—transit infrastructure that needs investment. It’s a community that wants that connectivity, whether it’s local infrastructure, whether it’s the road, whether it’s Highway 407, or whether it is transit and increased GO service.

The reality is that if we are going to make the investments that we know are necessary, not just in Whitby–Oshawa but across the province, we have to have the resources to do that. That’s what the broadening of the ownership of Hydro One is about: investing in that infrastructure that’s going to allow our economy to thrive.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary.

Mr. Todd Smith: It’s clear from documents that were put before this House before Christmas that the money from Hydro One isn’t going to infrastructure. If the Premier was actually listening in Whitby–Oshawa, why would she waste Justin Trudeau’s time in dragging him into an election that they were going to get resoundingly defeated in?

Speaker, one small business in my riding recently received a bill for $27,000 for a vacant LCBO building. When they challenged the bill, Hydro One had to admit that it had no idea that the LCBO had moved out, and they just continued to bill as if there was still an LCBO inside. Hydro One ended up settling—instead of $27,000—for $3,600, after they actually looked at the meter reading.

People have lost faith in Hydro One. They’ve lost faith in this Premier. They’ve lost faith in this government. Will the Premier stop the further sell-off of Hydro One in this Thursday’s budget?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Minister of Energy.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Be seated, please. Thank you.

The Premier passed it to the Minister of Energy.

Hon. Bob Chiarelli: First of all, I want to remind people that the province still owns 84% of Hydro One today. I also want to remind the members opposite that, of the proceeds from a partial sale of Hydro One shares, $5 billion is going to reduce provincial debt and $4 billion is going into infrastructure. Those are investments—or pay-down of debt—that are not coming from taxes or cutting programs. It is very, very smart fiscal management. Besides which, it is a better-managed company today, and it will become better as we go down the road.

They are making decisions now in this short time period that are adding value to shareholders. And I must repeat one more time that Hydro One does not control rates. They’re controlled by the Ontario Energy Board. So a better operating company—

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you.

New question.

Education funding

Mrs. Lisa Gretzky: My question is to the Minister of Education. Schools in this province are falling apart. Over the past five years alone, this government has underfunded school repairs by $5.8 billion. Add that to the previous repair backlog and we now have a shortfall of $15 billion—that’s billions, Speaker.

Kids are being forced to wear winter coats inside because classrooms are 12 degrees. Roofs are collapsing and children are being injured by broken infrastructure. While this government starves school boards of the resources they need to address these issues, students and families are being left behind.

My question is simple. With a budget on the horizon, Ontario families want to know: Will this government stop cuts to the classroom and commit to fixing the disrepair in our schools?

Hon. Liz Sandals: I’m pleased to report that, in fact, we have continued to increase education funding. If you look at the amount of funding that was received in 2003 and compare it to today, it’s up $8.1 billion. That’s 56%, at a time when the number of students has decreased.

Interjection: I think she said “billion.”

Hon. Liz Sandals: Billion with a “b.”

The amount per pupil has gone up. The absolute amount has gone up. The amount of funding for school renewal has gone up. The amount for school renovations has gone up. The amount of money for school repairs has gone up. Everything is going up.

While there do continue to be schools that are not in great shape, we have actually fixed the funding model—

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you.

Supplementary?

Mrs. Lisa Gretzky: That just shows how out of touch the minister is, because the needs of the students have increased, the cost of electricity has increased and the cost of transportation has increased. Therefore, the budgets are not sufficient.

Again, to the Minister: Ontario boasts highly qualified education and child-care workers, bright students and parents who want what’s best for their children. This morning, organizations like Fix Our Schools, the Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario and the Ontario Coalition for Better Child Care held a press conference at Queen’s Park to demand answers. Directors of education, trustees and students also attended.

The Minister of Education needs to put our students first. Kids are paying the price for her misplaced priorities. This government must recognize that it’s unacceptable that kids are wearing winter coats in classrooms.

Will this government repair our schools and finally provide a safe and equal opportunity education for all Ontario students?

Hon. Liz Sandals: It might interest you to know, because it sounds as if you don’t actually realize this, that every year, when we review the operating funding for school boards, we actually do increase the operating funding based on increases in utility costs, so that the school board funding is adjusted for increases in electricity and natural gas costs each year, every year, as they occur. So that is factored into school boards.

It might also interest the people in the gallery to know that we’ve spent $13.9 billion to build 755 new schools in Ontario. We have built, in addition to that, 720 renovations and major additions. We have been significantly investing in our schools, and there’s another $11 billion—

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you.

New question.

Beverage alcohol sales

Mr. Arthur Potts: My question is to the Minister of Finance. Just last week, our government made a very important announcement that will boost consumer convenience and choice in Ontario. It seems only a few weeks ago that I stood third in line behind the Premier and the finance minister at the Leslie Street Loblaws as I purchased my first six-pack of Molson Canadian and Steam Whistle beer.

Last week, we announced that in total, up to 300 grocery stores, both large chains and independents, will also now be selling wine. By this fall, 70 grocery stores will be authorized to have wine, as well as fruit wine, beer and cider, sold on their shelves.

Speaker, will the minister please tell us about the great economic opportunities that this much-appreciated announcement will create?

Hon. Charles Sousa: I would like to thank the member from Beaches–East York for the question and also for his advocacy on this matter. I know that he has been a champion of the beverage alcohol industry, and I thank him for his continuous work.

The changes will create a win-win-win outcome for the province’s wine lovers, for Ontario’s local domestic wine producers and the farmers who support them, as well as for wines from all over the world. By selling wine in grocery stores, we’ll also help to boost economic growth and preserve jobs in Ontario’s wine, agriculture and tourism sectors. This will also help to maintain a vital source of economic growth and opportunity for the province’s farm sector.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Arthur Potts: Cheers, Mr. Speaker. I would like to thank the minister for his answer and for this well-deserved and well-received initiative.

These changes really are a win-win-win for farmers, consumers and retailers in Ontario. I’m particularly pleased about the fact that as part of these changes, cider and fruit wines will also now be available in grocery stores.

I know that Ontario’s producers in these emerging categories—cider being the fastest-growing segment in the LCBO. I’m excited to await the successes that they will achieve when afforded wider market access.

Speaker, will the minister share with this House how this government will also benefit Ontario consumers by these changes?

Hon. Charles Sousa: Again, I would like to thank the member for the question and for the cheers; I appreciate that. I too share the excitement for the potential growth for cider producers in Ontario with these changes.

As we’ve announced, wine and beer producers will benefit greatly from this change, along with craft brewers and distillers; craft distillers are important here as well. They will now be able to deliver directly to restaurants and bars—a change they have long advocated for. They will also now receive better selling commissions in their on-site stores. All of these changes have taken place while our government maintains our strong commitment to social responsibility wherever beverage alcohol is sold.

Hydro rates

Ms. Laurie Scott: My question is to the Minister of Energy. We have continuously demanded that the Liberal government do something to address the damage resulting from their disastrous energy policies—policies that have driven the price of electricity from 4.3 cents per kilowatt hour to 17.5 cents on-peak. They’re driving people into poverty just to pay off their hydro bills. And what do we get from this government? They continuously make excuses, put new packaging around shell games and confuse ratepayers even more.

The bottom line is that when people pick up their hydro bills, they see them continuing to rise at alarming rates. It’s not only hurting ratepayers; it’s seriously damaging our economy.

Speaker, will the minister commit to a credible plan to bring in affordable energy rates in this year’s budget?

Hon. Bob Chiarelli: I might remind the member that just several days ago, we announced $100 million to assist 36,000 people in this province to reduce their energy bills. I might remind the member as well that that party supported us with the nuclear refurbishment projects that we just announced several months ago, which will show electricity going into the grid at seven and a half to eight cents per kilowatt hour. That’s a very, very major initiative.

The National Energy Board projects our increase in electricity prices over the next 16 years for residential owners to be 1.7%, which is around the rate of inflation or less, because of the investments and decisions that we’re making in the system today.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Ms. Laurie Scott: I have more people in poverty than ever before, and it’s because of their hydro rates. I don’t need more stories and excuses. The first thing the government needs to do is to stop doing what you have been doing, because it’s clearly not working.

With rates four times higher than when you came into office, and a scathing Auditor General’s report that shows that consumers are paying $37 billion more than they should have paid, it clearly highlights that there needs to be a policy reversal. Thanks for the $100 million, but you’ve already overcharged them by $37 billion.

Will the minister commit today to creating an energy plan that is credible and will bring affordable energy rates, and stop signing those exorbitant contracts for unreliable energy that are continuing to drive hydro rates up even further?

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Be seated, please. Thank you.

Minister of Energy?

Hon. Bob Chiarelli: One of the things that’s happening to reduce rates is a conservation program at Hydro One. They have initiated a project which is saving those who participate, particularly in rural areas, between $800 and $1,200 a year. It’s a heat pump program where they subsidize the installation of the heat pump. The record in Nova Scotia, and now in Ontario, with the program that they’ve started is saving customers between $800 and $1,200 a year. That’s something that’s really, really concrete, in addition to the $100 million we just invested for retrofits in the province.

We are taking very significant action in many different ways, and I would challenge the member to come to my office for a briefing on all of the things that we’re doing for the electricity sector. Perhaps then the questions will be more informed.

Climate change

Mr. Peter Tabuns: My question is to the Minister of the Environment and Climate Change. People don’t want money from a cap-and-trade program to be used as a Liberal Party slush fund. They want to see this money actually tackling climate change, helping families to reduce their carbon footprint and save money.

And yet, the government announced several spending programs recently, including a $3,000 rebate on a $150,000 electric car, without showing how much greenhouse gases would be reduced by the program, if any.

Will these spending programs include transparent, evidence-based projections showing that they will actually help families and the climate, rather than just the Liberal Party of Ontario?

Hon. Glen R. Murray: I’ll take that as support from the member opposite for the initiatives. The entire dynamic of how we measure GHGs—your point is well-taken; that will be part of the five-year action plan.

The electric vehicle program—run by my colleague the Minister of Transportation, who has provided extraordinary leadership—brings down the cost of an electric vehicle to being extraordinarily affordable. In some cases, if you’re buying the Chevy Spark, it’s a few thousand dollars, for seniors and for families.

It also means that electric vehicles are creating a lot of jobs, opening up our ability to attract more investment in the electric sector, and making life much more affordable. It’s the same thing with our social housing and the retrofit programs the Minister of Energy is running.

These are good-news stories. They help make life more affordable. They create jobs, and it’s good news.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Peter Tabuns: We’ve seen the Liberals have fun with numbers before. The government created the Trillium Trust as a dedicated fund for infrastructure in 2014, but then dissolved the fund as a special-purpose account just one year later. The only way we can be sure that cap-and-trade money won’t be used as a slush fund is to keep the money separate.

The Canadian Environmental Law Association recommends that revenue from a cap-and-trade program flow into a separate and transparent special-purpose account and not into general government revenue. Will the government keep cap-and-trade funds separate so their use is transparent?

Hon. Glen R. Murray: You don’t get much more transparent than $325 million in specific allocations announced by the President of the Treasury Board. Each one of those programs is being run, in most cases, by a third party, the Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters association and other partner organizations. They submit and they account directly for that funding. You can’t get much more transparent than that.

Mr. Speaker, you’ll see, when the climate change legislation—because I know the NDP is very good at spending money. We’ll find out in the next week or two whether they’ll actually support a price on pollution, which I hope they will. If they’ll support a price on pollution, you will see the accounting exercise being very, very clear.

We have to meet the same standards as Quebec and California under the Western Climate Initiative, and we a have third-party review by the compact of regions that we’re actually making progress. There isn’t a jurisdiction that is being held to a higher standard than we are.

Job creation

Ms. Ann Hoggarth: I’d like to direct my question to the Minister of Economic Development, Employment and Infrastructure. Last month, Ontario gained nearly 20,000 net new jobs, which adds to a long line of months of growth of jobs in this province. In fact, I understand that, in the last two months alone, Ontario has gained a net of 50,000 jobs. While it sounds like steady growth, I recently heard the Leader of the Opposition on CP24 insinuating that Ontario is actually losing jobs.

If the Leader of the Opposition is incorrect in that statement, I’m concerned that Ontarians may not be getting the straight facts on the strength of Ontario’s economic growth. I would certainly encourage all legislators to refrain from talking Ontario’s economy down and, instead, accurately—

Interjections.

Ms. Ann Hoggarth: Minister, please advise this House on how Ontario is doing in attracting investment and jobs.

Hon. Brad Duguid: I’m very pleased to confirm to the member that Ontario’s economy continues to grow. Ontarians are being inundated, however, with economic news about challenges in the overall Canadian economy.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Oops. The member from Hamilton East–Stoney Creek is warned.

Please finish.

Hon. Brad Duguid: Okay, Mr. Speaker. The national news is often inundated with tough times that are taking place in our sister province, in Alberta. The fact that Ontario’s economic performance has been much stronger than the national picture and is trending in a much more positive direction can sometimes get lost in that national coverage. Ontario continues to lead this country in growth and in job creation.

Here are the facts, not according to me, but Stats Canada: Since 2009, Ontario has gained 608,300 net new jobs—

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you. Supplementary.

Ms. Ann Hoggarth: I’m pleased to hear that, overall, Ontario’s economy continues to be on the upswing. That’s good news for Ontario workers and for families all across this province.

Many of us will be joining our municipal partners later today at the Ontario Good Roads Association/ROMA conference. While Ontario is excelling in job creation overall, I know that some regions of the province are still struggling. Some parts of the province were hit harder by global recession than others and still need some support to enjoy the overall level of growth experienced province-wide. As well, our manufacturing sector is still transitioning to global initiatives.

Can the minister share with this Legislature some of the measures he is taking to drive regional economic growth and growth in manufacturing?

Hon. Brad Duguid: What an important and timely question. While Ontario has led North America for two years in a row in attracting foreign direct investment, we continue to lead Canada in job creation and growth.

The fact is, though, some regions of our province were hit harder by the global recession than others, and some are still struggling. That’s why we ignored the advice of the opposition and took the advice of our local municipal partners when we established our regional economic development funds. We’ve invested $170 million through our regional economic development funds, which has leveraged $1.8 billion in private sector investment and has created or supported over 41,000 jobs in eastern and southwestern Ontario. The vast majority of those investments are in manufacturing. In fact, over the last 12 months alone, we’ve seen 15,000 net new manufacturing jobs added to this province.

We’re not done; we have more work to do. But we’re going to continue to diligently invest in these programs.

Property taxation

Mr. Norm Miller: My question is for the Minister of Finance. This week is the start of the Rural Ontario Municipal Association annual conference. You may remember the Premier’s speech in 2015 where she promised, “We will reform the provincial land tax ... we will bring forward proposals that can be implemented” this year. Well, Minister, it has been a year, and still silence from your government.

My question is simple: When will the Minister of Finance table reforms that will find a meaningful solution for both municipalities and Ontarians living in unorganized territories, or is this just another stretch goal?

Hon. Charles Sousa: Thank you for the question. I appreciate the concern, because it’s something that we all share, recognizing the impact it has on municipalities. We also understand the issue with regard to unincorporated lands and unincorporated properties and regions around those respective municipalities. Those consultations have been ongoing and have been proceeding. We recognize that those neighbouring municipalities want a component share of that. The Premier made that commitment. We are working on that. In the upcoming budget, we’ll have more to say.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Norm Miller: Minister of Finance, this is an issue that requires real leadership and a real commitment to the people of northern Ontario, in both unorganized territories and municipalities. Because of this Liberal government’s cuts to the Ontario Municipal Partnership Fund, northern municipalities need financial assistance now more than ever. The minister promised to help, but now he’s nowhere to be found.

When the Minister of Finance speaks to the rural and northern mayors at the minister’s forum later today, will he apologize for breaking yet another promise?

Hon. Charles Sousa: We made a commitment to actually provide municipalities with $505 million in unconditional funding through the OMPF. The OMPF, combined with the municipal benefit results from the provincial uploads, totals $2.3 billion, nearly four times the level of funding provided in 2004. This is the equivalent of 13% of municipal property tax revenue in the province.

The member knows perfectly well that the OMPF has been revised, but that supports for those communities is continuing. Frankly, it was a result of the uploads and the downloading of the previous government that created a lot of havoc and a lot of stress in the system. We’ve uploaded. We’re providing support. There are net benefits going to those municipalities. They’ll continue. They have our support. Much more will be said in the budget that’s going to provide them with a great degree of support. We hope we can count on your support for them as a result.

Automobile insurance

Mr. Jagmeet Singh: My question is to the Premier. This government has created two worlds in Ontario: There’s one world where the rest of us live, and there’s the other world where the Liberal government and their powerful lobbyists live, like the auto insurance industry, which currently enjoys record profits at the same time as Ontarians pay the highest auto insurance premiums in the entire country.

The government was pushed by New Democrats in 2013 to reduce auto insurance premiums by 15%. The government responded and said that they would complete this promise within two years. That timeline is long gone, and this government hasn’t even achieved half of that promise. In response, the Premier has said, “Oh, that was simply a stretch goal,” something they never intended completing anyway.

The timeline has passed. The Liberals have broken their promise. New Democrats call this stretch goal a broken promise. How can Ontarians trust this government to fulfill any—

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you. Premier?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Minister of Finance.

Hon. Charles Sousa: I appreciate the question. I remind the member opposite that, had we proceeded with the work we did on time and as scheduled, some of that benefit would be had now. But because of the delays and the obstructions by the members opposite, we’ve now had to provide for legislation that was later than expected.

The fact of the matter is, insurance rates are going down, not up. Many insurance companies, because it’s a competitive industry, have already started to provide 15% reductions in their insurance premiums.

Furthermore, it’s not at a point in time that matters most. It’s on an ongoing basis to ensure that there’s a structural change in the system to provide for lower costs of claims and better benefits for the 9.5 million drivers that exist.

We’re doing our job. We hope we can count on their support going forward.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Let’s be clear: This Liberal government and this Premier have the power and the ability to reduce auto insurance premiums, but they won’t because it’s not a priority for this government. The government has made it clear that they’re continuing to break promise after promise. The Premier likes to call those simply stretch goals: promises that they make but that they never intend to complete anyway.

In the upcoming budget, Ontarians want to see some real commitments. They want to see investments in health care. They want to see commitments to ensure that we have good-paying permanent jobs in this province. They want to see affordable auto insurance rates and they don’t want to see continual slashing and cutting of our benefits. They want to see investment that actually builds transit in this province, but they know better than to trust this government. They know that this government is going to just make more stretch goals.

My question is simple: What other stretch goals can we look forward to in this upcoming budget?

Hon. Charles Sousa: Ontario currently has and will continue to have the most generous benefits anywhere in the country. That will continue. The member opposite is well aware that a number of changes are being proposed in terms of making the processing of claims more efficient to provide greater benefit to the victims and those who are in need, and to enable more affordability and more efficiency in the system. Those are the proposed changes that we’re making, as well as anti-fraud measures and other things that enable the system to be less expensive.

We put those changes in place, they delayed them, and now we’re trying to still catch up as a result of those delays. We’re getting there. Many of these companies are competitive. They are providing for lower rates and they’ll continue to do so, provided the member opposite doesn’t obstruct them any further.

First responders

Mrs. Kathryn McGarry: My question is for the Minister of Labour. I was pleased when the minister introduced the Supporting Ontario’s First Responders Act. First responders are at risk of PTSD due to the traumatic situations that they have to engage in and the accumulative effect of experiencing these traumatic events.

For example, during a shift as a nurse in the emergency room at Cambridge hospital, a child came in with no vital signs from a car crash. A police officer guided the stretcher, and a paramedic and firefighter performed CPR. We couldn’t save him. They were very upset but had to attend to other incidents that shift. The same paramedics attended several other traumatic events during the next week. With no supports to help them cope, one paramedic was later diagnosed with PTSD. She was delayed in getting WSIB, hampering her recovery.

Can the minister please inform the House what this legislation entails and the significance it will have if passed?

Hon. Kevin Daniel Flynn: I’d like to thank the member for her question and for the interest of all members of the House in this very important topic. Last Thursday, I introduced the Supporting Ontario’s First Responders Act. Now, I know that all members in this House reconize that post-traumatic stress disorder is a very significant risk to the health and well-being of first responders in this province. Physical injuries we can spot pretty clearly; psychological injuries take a lot more.

If passed by the House, this bill is going to create a presumption that PTSD diagnosed in first responders is a result of the workers’ employment. Their claims to the WSIB will be automatically approved after that. This will provide for immediate identification of the issue, immediate intervention and immediate treatment for the first responders.

I’m very proud of this bill. I hope it gets the support of the entire House.

Mrs. Kathryn McGarry: Thank you, Minister, for your response.

I know he has worked hard to advocate for our first responders. Some of them, including some firefighters from my community of Cambridge, came to Queen’s Park to show their support when the minister announced the proposed legislation. These changes, if passed, would make a big difference in the lives of dedicated professionals who experience traumatic events in the course of their work.

This legislation supports those who are already suffering from PTSD. I know that this government has emphasized a comprehensive plan that supports cultural change to overcome stigma and provides the mental tools necessary to respond to events and build resiliency, as well as to help prevent PTSD from occurring in the first place.

Can the minister please share with the House the prevention pieces of this comprehensive PTSD strategy for our first responders?

Hon. Kevin Daniel Flynn: That is an excellent question because it points out that we need a comprehensive strategy on this and that while it’s important that the bill pass—that the legislation in the House pass—it’s also important that we have preventive legislation and preventive programs in this regard. So with the full support of the Premier, I brought forward what I think is a comprehensive plan that addresses the legislative portion and that also addresses the prevention portion.

Prevention initiatives are:

—we’re going to have an awareness campaign that you’ll be hearing on the radio very soon;

—a leadership summit in which the first responders want to see duplicated the success we had last year;

—an online tool kit for all employers in this province so that you can come from the smallest municipality and you’ll have access to the same information as the city of Toronto.

There’s more research emerging on this issue. Ontario is going to stay on top of that research. We’re going to be a leader in this regard.

Wind turbines

Mr. Jim Wilson: My question is for the Premier. A few days ago, the province approved the wpd wind turbine project in my riding of Simcoe–Grey. This project will result in eight 500-foot wind turbines placed literally right next door to Collingwood Regional Airport.

The municipalities in my riding don’t want this project. As I’ve said several times in this House, the people of my riding aren’t in favour of it either. The municipalities have done a study that shows the turbines will hurt the local economy and future investment at the airport. Furthermore, this project endangers pilots and public safety.

The towers will be the tallest structures in all of rural Ontario, throughout Canada. They’re as tall as the TD office tower in downtown Toronto.

Mr. Speaker, given all these points, can the Premier tell us why her government is ignoring the safety of the people of Simcoe–Grey, Canada’s pilots and the local municipalities in allowing this project to proceed?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Minister of the Environment and Climate Change.

Hon. Glen R. Murray: I thank the honourable member for his question. We’ve had this conversation a few times. As he knows, in this case, we took extraordinary measures to consult, adding—

Interjections.

Hon. Glen R. Murray: Well, maybe they don’t know this, Mr. Speaker—but extending our standard—

Interjections.

Hon. Glen R. Murray: Mr. Speaker, I can’t even hear myself, never mind the opposition.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Enough.

Hon. Glen R. Murray: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We added six months to the standard review over two years. We considered over 350 public and agency comments and looked at the economic side.

But I want to be very clear about this: Nav Canada reviewed this not once, not twice, but three times—they set the standards for air navigation—and they found no problem with it, Mr. Speaker—

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you. The member from Prince Edward–Hastings, albeit late, is warned. But there’s always time for another one.

Supplementary.

Mr. Jim Wilson: Well, Mr. Speaker, I’ve heard this gibberish from the minister before. He doesn’t know what the heck he’s talking about on this issue. Nav Can told me and the Deputy Minister of Transportation a year and a half ago that they didn’t have any rules for this sort of situation because they didn’t think that any government would be stupid enough to build eight 500-foot wind turbines close to a regional airport, so they don’t have any rules.

I hope you’re aware that you’re the only government in Canada that took away local powers to plan. You’ve changed the Planning Act. Everybody else, when they have this situation, can say, “Move your towers.” They can’t do that in Ontario.

You’ve ignored everything you’ve heard on this issue and you keep hiding behind Nav Canada, and Nav Canada told you, “Don’t put the towers there. We don’t have any rules to protect you.”

Their advice to the airport is, “If it gets really bad, close the airport. If it gets bad enough, change your runways. Move your runways.” We’re expecting tens of millions of dollars to invest in—

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Be seated, please. Thank you.

Minister?

Hon. Glen R. Murray: Let’s just review this carefully. On January 5, 2016, NAV Canada gave their first opinion, saying that the Fairview project will have minimal impact on the current or future operations of the CRA. On January 7, Transport Canada said the same thing. And on January 14, NAV Canada again provided their comments based on the town’s analysis that this is not interfering with their requirements.

We had his party in power federally, and this is a federally regulated standard. We appealed to the federal minister to review it. She did not return my phone calls, Mr. Speaker; maybe the member opposite had the same luck. This is within NAV Canada’s standards and guidelines. It is not a provincial responsibility.

Finally, it is not my decision. It is a decision of the director, of a public servant. And the member is suggesting I politicize it by inserting myself improperly and illegally in the decision—

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you.

There are no deferred votes. This House stands recessed until 1 p.m. this afternoon.

The House recessed from 1146 to 1300.

Introduction of Visitors

Mr. Randy Pettapiece: I was remiss this morning in not introducing the grandmother and brother of our page captain Andrew Johnson. Joyce Johnson and Evan Johnson were here this morning.

Order of business

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The deputy House leader on a point of order.

Hon. James J. Bradley: Point of order, Mr. Speaker: I believe we have unanimous consent to put forward a motion without notice regarding today’s routine proceedings.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The government House leader is seeking unanimous consent to put forward a motion without notice. Do we agree? Agreed.

Hon. James J. Bradley: I believe you will find that we have unanimous consent for a representative from each caucus to speak for up to five minutes regarding regulation 17 prior to the commencement of routine proceedings, and that members be permitted to wear Franco-Ontarian pins.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The deputy government House leader is seeking unanimous consent to have the motion adhered to. Do we agree? Agreed.

Motion agreed to.

L’hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Je tiens à accomplir deux tâches importantes aujourd’hui à l’Assemblée.

First, to deliver on a promise I made in December to speak truth about a government regulation that effectively outlawed public French-language education for a generation of schoolchildren one century ago; and second, I wish to recognize how far our province has come since that time.

De nos jours, nous célébrons la culture francophone. Les communautés francophones ont contribué à faire de l’Ontario une province dynamique et prospère.

Today, I want to acknowledge regulation 17 as one of those barriers.

Le règlement 17 a été adopté en 1912.

In 1912, regulation 17 prohibited primary schools from using French as a language of instruction or communication beyond grade 2, allowing only one hour per day for French to be taught as a subject in primary schools.

The francophone community feared that Franco-Ontarian children were losing their language.

The government enforced regulation 17 for more than a decade before finally conceding that the policy was a failure. But it stayed on the books much longer.

Aujourd’hui, au nom du gouvernement de l’Ontario, je présente des excuses à tous les Franco-Ontariens dont la famille et les communautés ont souffert à cause du règlement 17.

Regulation 17 showed a disregard for Franco-Ontarian identity and equality, and on behalf of the government of Ontario, I offer an apology.

I want to thank MPP Glenn Thibeault for bringing forward this motion last December.

I want to also thank Minister Madeleine Meilleur for her tireless efforts to promote, protect and preserve the francophone presence in Ontario.

Je suis heureuse que nous ayons parmi nous aujourd’hui des personnes dont la famille ou la communauté ont été touchées par le règlement 17, de même que d’autres personnes qui ont rappelé à cette Assemblée ce

chapitre de notre histoire.

The tremendous courage and tenacity of Franco-Ontarians has not gone unnoticed.

We can all be proud of the distance Ontario has travelled. In just a few generations, Ontario has gone from a place that was, at times, resistant to diversity to a place that fully embraces different cultures and languages—from fearing our differences to celebrating and learning from them.

Ainsi, les réalisations des Franco-Ontariens nous donnent de grands espoirs que notre société continuera à reconnaître la vérité sur notre passé et nos victoires durement gagnées. Car, c’est ainsi que nous pouvons continuer à renforcer l’égalité, à multiplier les possibilités et à donner à toutes les communautés le respect, la reconnaissance et les ressources que nous méritons tous et toutes. Merci beaucoup.

Le Président (L’hon. Dave Levac): Merci beaucoup, madame la Première Ministre.

And now, the member from Leeds–Grenville and the deputy leader.

M. Steve Clark: Je tiens à remercier la première ministre de mettre cette déclaration de l’avant. C’est un plaisir pour moi d’en discuter cet après-midi.

Les francophones ont contribué à bâtir la province que nous avons aujourd’hui, avec plus de 611 000 francophones et francophiles, comme moi, vivant maintenant en Ontario.

Monsieur le Président, je prends la parole aujourd’hui au nom de ma collègue la députée Martow, qui est la porte-parole des Affaires francophones de notre parti. En fait, la députée Martow se trouve aujourd’hui à une conférence francophone.

Je vous remercie, monsieur le Président, de m’avoir donné cette opportunité aujourd’hui.

Le Président (L’hon. Dave Levac): Merci beaucoup.

Now, the leader of the third party.

No government should ever pass discriminatory measures. It is appalling that francophones had their future stripped away from them because regulation 17 meant that they could no longer attend school in their mother tongue. The lasting impacts of this assimilation policy created barriers to education for francophone Ontarians for many decades.

Although much progress has been made in the realm of French-language education in Ontario, barriers still remain. Francophone children do not always have access to French schools, and we still don’t have a French university governed for and by francophone Ontarians.

I hope that in remembering and apologizing for the severe consequences of regulation 17, we will all strive to continuously improve French-speaking education across this province.

Le gouvernement de l’époque a voulu assimiler la communauté francophone. Cette loi a eu des conséquences graves sur plusieurs générations. Les francophones de l’époque, n’ayant pas accès à l’école dans leur langue maternelle, ne pouvaient apprendre à lire et à écrire correctement.

Je suis navrée et je m’excuse, au nom de tous mes collègues néo-démocrates, pour cette politique discriminatoire.

Il faut souligner avec fierté les efforts que le peuple franco-ontarien a faits pour revendiquer leurs droits. Mais il ne faut surtout pas oublier les conséquences désastreuses du règlement 17 sur des générations de francophones qui ont dû vivre leur vie sans éducation, et surtout ne pas oublier les barrières qui existent encore aujourd’hui pour les jeunes francophones de cette province.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): I thank all members for their statements. Merci beaucoup.

Members’ Statements

Lennox and Addington Interval House

Mr. Randy Hillier: This morning, the Lennox and Addington Interval House in Napanee was awarded the third annual Family Advocacy Award, which honours people and organizations that make a positive contribution to the lives of families.

Interval House earned this reward for their 24 years of service and their great work on helping those affected by domestic violence throughout Napanee and Lennox and Addington. Interval House has provided services which have made a great and a positive difference in many lives and provided safety to those affected by domestic violence. They have provided shelters to those brave enough to leave; resources for those attempting to help; legal information to help regain a sense of justice; and a helping and caring hand, and listening ears, to help end the isolation.

I’d like to congratulate the Lennox and Addington Interval House once again for all their great efforts, which have resulted in this award, and all that they do to improve the lives of families in Lennox and Addington and the greater Napanee region.

Coldest Night of the Year

Ms. Jennifer K. French: February 20 marked the Coldest Night of the Year, and this past Saturday, communities across the province came together to walk for awareness of and raise funds for homelessness.

In Oshawa, our Coldest Night of the Year walk benefited The Refuge outreach centre. The Refuge does invaluable work across our community to support our homeless, hungry and hurting youth.

This year was a balmy 10 degrees, so it wasn’t as cold as years prior, and we were warmed by the spirit of the volunteers and the shared purpose. In fact, there were 92 participating communities across the country, and Oshawa placed 11th in funds raised, but fifth overall in terms of number of participants. That is what community is all about.

Speaker, events like this remind us how generous our communities are, but we should not have to rely on generosity to ensure that all of our community members are safe and warm. When it comes to homelessness, this government is failing. We have a poverty reduction strategy in Ontario, but there are no measurable targets in place. In my experience, a strategy without targets isn’t much of a strategy at all.

Interjection: It’s a stretch.

Ms. Jennifer K. French: It’s a stretch. According to Ontario’s chief coroner, this government doesn’t even keep track of homeless deaths. They don’t keep track, they don’t measure and they don’t seem to care.

Homelessness is a very real challenge across the province. I challenge this government to care, to set real and measurable targets. Perhaps then we can stop relying on the generosity of communities to crowd-fund Ontario’s poverty reduction.

Singh Khalsa Sewa Club

Mr. Vic Dhillon: This past Christmas, the Singh Khalsa Sewa Club organized a massive food and clothing drive within my riding of Brampton West. The word “sewa” means “help without the expectation of anything in return.”

The response from the community members was enthusiastic and very positive. On Christmas Day, donations of goods collected were handed over to Knights Table, a wonderful organization in Brampton West serving the needs of people dealing with the issues of poverty and homelessness.

The volunteers from the Singh Khalsa Sewa Club did not consider Christmas as just another holiday. They worked tirelessly through the week prior to Christmas to go door to door in my riding of Brampton West. In their feedback, this organization advised me that the community was very kind and generous to those in need at this special time of the year.

I look forward to working at the grassroots level with the Singh Khalsa Sewa Club to continue to work towards integrating every member in my riding, to spread the message of the Canadian values of oneness and living in harmony.

Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate the Singh Khalsa Sewa Club and the Knights Table for all the great work they do for our community.

Bernard Cameron

Mr. Jack MacLaren: Bernard Cameron died tragically on February 11. He will be sadly missed by his wife, Catherine, his four children, his six grandchildren, his four brothers, his extended family and the community of Almonte, where he lived.

Bernard graduated from the University of Western Ontario, and was a much-respected high school teacher. He served as a Boy Scout leader for 25 years and was on the board of the Mississippi Valley Textile Museum. He was also elected to two terms as councillor for the municipality of Mississippi Mills.

Bernard Cameron will be greatly missed by all.

I ask that we have a moment of silence to remember Bernard Cameron.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): With the member’s indulgence, can I do a unanimous consent after the rest of the statements?

Mr. Jack MacLaren: Yes.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you.

Coldest Night of the Year

Miss Monique Taylor: Saturday brought record temperatures to many parts of Ontario, but it was also the Coldest Night of the Year in over 40 communities across Ontario, where thousands of women, men and children walked to raise money to support their neighbours who are hungry, homeless or hurting.

On Hamilton Mountain, it was my great pleasure to head over to St. Stephen on the Mount, which was the base camp for the walk in support of Neighbour to Neighbour, our local food bank, before we headed out with 300 other walkers.

This was the third annual Coldest Night walk organized by Neighbour to Neighbour. As in past years, it was a great feeling to see our community coming together to support an organization that puts people first.

Offering housing support, family budgeting, counselling and various food programs, Neighbour to Neighbour is a vital part of our community and we are fortunate to have the dedicated staff and volunteers who run it.

The walk on the mountain raised almost $55,000, and that was at last count. I know every penny will be put to good use.

I want to offer my sincere thanks to the organizers of the Coldest Night of the Year walk; to the event sponsors; to all who walked; and especially to the volunteers who took care of the registration, greeted us along the route and welcomed us back with a piping hot cup of chili.

International Mother Language Day

Mr. Arthur Potts: This past weekend I participated in a series of events celebrating International Mother Language Day. My member’s statement today is especially important, considering the apology that this House has heard about regulation 17, which prohibited Franco–Ontarians from being taught in their mother language.

International Mother Language Day was created in 1999 by a Bangladeshi living in Vancouver; to promote awareness of linguistic and cultural diversity, and the value of multilingualism.

The choice of the day commemorates the killing of four students on February 21, 1952, as they protested for the right to speak Bangla in Dhaka, Pakistan, which eventually led to the independence of Bangladesh. The event reinforces the critical importance of language in preserving a people’s culture, traditions and history.

In 2009, Ontario officially recognized February 21 as International Mother Language Day. Our local Bangladeshi community created a number of events to reflect the theme—I was honoured to participate in them—including an open discussion on the role of language in education and integration in Canadian society, an art and poetry competition for children in the Bangladeshi community, a large rally that went to a memorial on Danforth Avenue, and a sombre yet beautiful commemoration of those who gave their lives fighting for the right to speak their mother tongue.

We are fortunate, Speaker, to live in a province where so many languages are spoken and so many cultures are sustained through the teaching and sharing of their languages, including our First Nations languages. I encourage you and this House to join me in recognition of International Mother Language Day, to remember the sacrifice of those students so many years ago, and to celebrate those who preserve and sustain their languages today.

Wiarton Willie Festival

Mr. Bill Walker: As you may be aware, Wiarton is home to Canada’s foremost weather prognosticator, Wiarton Willie. This year was a very special celebration as we hosted the diamond 60th anniversary of the Wiarton Willie Festival on February 2.

Groundhog Day is one of the most popular events in Ontario. Without a shadow of a doubt, it was one of the best-ever celebrations and saw thousands of visitors from all corners of the country flock to my beautiful riding of Bruce–Grey–Owen Sound to see the world-famous albino groundhog cast his shadow and declare six more weeks of winter.

I was also pleased to host our party’s leader, Patrick Brown, during his first visit to the festival, as well as my colleague Randy Pettapiece from Perth–Wellington, who also has a cottage in nearby Lion’s Head.

Everyone enjoyed a great weekend, which featured a festival queen pageant, hockey tournaments, curling bonspiels, ice carving, buskers and a zoo, just to name a few family-friendly events. None of this fun would have been possible without the genius idea of its founder, Mac McKenzie, who sent out invitations to the first Groundhog Day gathering, held in his backyard in 1956 in an effort to break the winter blues.

Willie has always been well-cared for over the years by handlers John Makela, Sam Brouwer and Don Crain. This year Willie’s prediction was six more weeks of winter, which put him at odds with that of his Pennsylvania counterpart, Punxsutawney Phil, and Shubenacadie Sam in Nova Scotia. But that’s okay. This was not the first time Willie generated excitement.

You see, I was the spin doctor, the spokesperson in 1999, and Tom Ashman and Dee Cherrie-Ashman were key organizers in the year of his infamous demise, when the albino prognosticator passed away just days before Groundhog Day. We garnered media attention from all around the world and had so many messages of condolence and well wishes that it crashed our Internet: over one million hits in three hours.

Fortunately, Willie’s son Wee Willie, who had tunnelled his way to our nation’s capital, returned and continues making the annual famous predictions for the whole world to hear.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): We welcome Willie.

Youth Bocce Canada

Mrs. Laura Albanese: I would like to recognize today Youth Bocce Canada, which is proudly associated with Special Olympics Ontario, and their 23rd Youth Bocce Canada championship for athletes with special needs, which is happening this Friday, February 26 at the Amesbury Sports Complex in my riding of York South–Weston.

This exceptional organization was founded in 1994 by my constituent Lee Prioriello, whose passion, vision and dedication have affected so many. The organization’s mission is to support over 400 athletes with special needs in the GTA and York region. The game of bocce is used to promote participation, socialization and a sense of community.

The championship taking place this next Friday is extremely important to special-needs youth as it gives them a chance to participate in a sport in a team environment. Remarkably, Youth Bocce Canada hosts the largest bocce tournament in all of Canada. It also provides bursary awards for special financial needs participants and organizes pilgrimages with small groups of participants. They have travelled to France, to Italy and to the Vatican.

Youth Bocce Canada is a private organization; it is not funded by the government. All events are made possible with the support of many committed sponsors that purchase advertisements in the Youth Bocce Magazine.

Congratulations to Youth Bocce Canada on their tournament, to Lee Prioriello as the founder, and thank you to all of the volunteers for all they do for the special youth and kids in our community.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Grazie.

Coldest Night of the Year

Mr. Glenn Thibeault: I’m always honoured to rise in this House and speak about some great work that’s happening in my riding. Just this past weekend, in the riding of Sudbury, we were part of a national campaign which is called the Coldest Night of the Year. It’s a walk held around the country that raises money for the hungry, the homeless and the hurting in 100-plus cities.

What I’m very proud of, Mr. Speaker, is two things: First off, about 300 people in my riding participated in this walk, and over $50,000 was raised to help programs in my great riding of Sudbury that help the homeless and the hungry. Specifically the Samaritan Centre, which is a phenomenal place and does great work, ranked 13th out of 2,800 teams of walkers. They did great work. We also had four teams in Sudbury that were in the top 100 nationally, and seven walkers from Sudbury were also in the top 100 nationally. So not only are we doing great work to try and raise funds to help the homeless in my community; we’re also caring for them and giving them fellowship.

I should also mention, Mr. Speaker, that the member from Newmarket–Aurora was also part of this walk in his great community, and so was the member from Durham. So we’re doing great things, not only as a government, but our communities are doing great things as well.

Bernard Cameron

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member from Carleton–Mississippi Mills has deferred unanimous consent for his friend Mr. Bernard Cameron. He’s seeking unanimous consent for a moment’s silence. Do we agree? Agreed.

Could I have all members please stand for a moment of silence in honour of Bernard Cameron.

The House observed a moment’s silence.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Pray be seated.

Introduction of Bills

Licensed Home Inspectors Act, 2016 / Loi de 2016 sur les inspecteurs d’habitations titulaires d’un permis

Mr. Dong moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 165,

An Act to regulate home inspectors / Projet de loi 165, Loi visant à réglementer les inspecteurs d’habitations.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

First reading agreed to.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member for a short statement.

Mr. Han Dong: In my riding of Trinity–Spadina, there have been a lot of changes. There are a lot of homes being bought up by younger families, and I just heard over and over in my constituency that this is very, very necessary to provide a layer of consumer protection. I think this is the time to do it, and I hope all members will be, after they study the details of the bill, supportive of this bill.

Mr. Gilles Bisson: Oh, new rule, Speaker? Okay.

Supply Act, 2016 / Loi de crédits de 2016

Ms. Matthews moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 166,

An Act to authorize the expenditure of certain amounts for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2016 / Projet de loi 166, Loi autorisant l’utilisation de certaines sommes pour l’exercice se terminant le 31 mars 2016.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.

First reading agreed to.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member for a short statement.

Hon. Deborah Matthews: No, sir.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Introduction of bills?

Without the prodding from the member from Timmins–James Bay, I have an intent to make a comment on introducing private members’ bills or government bills. It’s always done with a simple statement that is in the explanatory notes. If you were to make reference to that, if the explanatory note is very long, we’re asking you to make a short précis of that explanatory note. So stay focused. It’s not the time to do debates or comments about your ridings or anything, other than to tell us what the bill is. Thank you very much.

Petitions

Privatization of public assets

Mr. Bill Walker: “To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas the current government under Premier Kathleen Wynne is calling for the sale of up to 60% of Hydro One shares into private ownership; and

“Whereas the decision to sell the public utility was made without any public input and the deal will continue to be done in complete secrecy; and

“Whereas the loss of majority ownership in Hydro One will force ratepayers to accept whatever changes the new owners decide, such as higher rates; and

“Whereas electricity rates are already sky-high and hurting family budgets as well as businesses; and

“Whereas ratepayers will never again have independent investigations of consumer complaints, such as the Ontario Ombudsman’s damning report on failed billing; and

“Whereas the people of Ontario are the true owners of Hydro One and they do not believe the fire sale of Hydro One is in their best interest;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:

“To protect Ontario ratepayers by stopping the sale of Hydro One.”

I fully support this, will affix my name and send it with page Owen.

Autism treatment

Miss Monique Taylor: I have a petition named “End the Wait-lists for IBI/ABA Services Now.

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas applied behaviour analysis (ABA) and intensive behavioural intervention (IBI) are the only recognized evidence-based practices known to treat autism spectrum disorder (ASD); and

“Whereas the combined number of children waiting for ABA and IBI therapies in Ontario is approximately 16,158; and

“Whereas estimates from the Ministry of Children and Youth Services for 2015-2016 indicate that only five more children are receiving IBI this year compared to last year and, shockingly, the number of children receiving ABA has dropped by almost 1,000 in the past two years—despite the fact that the wait-list is growing; and

“Whereas it is well known that early detection and early intervention is crucially important for children with ASD to learn to their fullest potential, and these programs set the stage for growth and development throughout children’s lives; and

“Whereas some families are being forced to remortgage houses or move to other provinces while other families have no option but to go without essential therapy; and

“Whereas the Premier and her government should not be balancing the budget on the backs of kids with ASD and their families;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to direct the government of Ontario immediately end the chronic wait-lists for IBI/ABA services for kids with autism spectrum disorder.”

I couldn’t agree with this more. I’m going to affix my name to it and give it to page Richard to bring to the Clerk.

Lung disease

Mrs. Kathryn McGarry: I’ve had a petition come in from around Ontario. This one is signed by people from Mississauga, Burlington and Haliburton. It’s addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

“Whereas lung disease affects more than 2.4 million people in the province of Ontario, more than 570,000 of whom are children;

“Of the four chronic diseases responsible for 79% of deaths” in Ontario “(cancers, cardiovascular diseases, lung disease and diabetes) lung disease is the only one without a dedicated province-wide strategy;

“In the Ontario Lung Association report, Your Lungs, Your Life, it is estimated that lung disease currently costs the Ontario taxpayers more than $4 billion a year in direct and indirect health care costs, and that this figure is estimated to rise to more than $80 billion seven short years from now;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:

“To allow for deputations on” the “private member’s bill, Bill 41, Lung Health Act, 2014, which establishes a Lung Health Advisory Council to make recommendations to the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care on lung health issues and requires the minister to develop and implement an Ontario Lung Health Action Plan with respect to research, prevention, diagnosis and treatment of lung disease; and

“Once debated at committee, to expedite” its passage through to royal assent.

I agree with the petition, sign my name and give it to Ryan to bring to the table.

Hydro rates

Mr. Ted Arnott: I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, and it reads as follows:

“Whereas the price of electricity has skyrocketed under the Ontario Liberal government;

“Whereas ever-higher hydro bills are a huge concern for everyone in the province, especially seniors and others on fixed incomes, who can’t afford to pay more;

“Whereas Ontario’s businesses say high electricity costs are making them uncompetitive, and have contributed to the loss of hundreds of thousands of manufacturing jobs;

“Whereas the recent Auditor General’s report found Ontarians overpaid for electricity by $37 billion over the past eight years and estimates that we will overpay by an additional $133 billion over the next 18 years if nothing changes;

“Whereas the cancellation of the Oakville and Mississauga gas plants costing $1.1 billion, feed-in tariff (FIT) contracts with wind and solar companies, the sale of surplus energy to neighbouring jurisdictions at a loss, the debt retirement charge, the global adjustment and smart meters that haven’t met their conservation targets have all put upward pressure on hydro bills;

“Whereas the sale of 60% of Hydro One is opposed by a majority of Ontarians and will likely only lead to even higher hydro bills;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:

“To listen to Ontarians, reverse course on the Liberal government’s current hydro policies and take immediate steps to stabilize hydro bills.”

I support this petition, and I’ve also affixed my signature to it.

Tenant protection

Ms. Cheri DiNovo: “To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas the cost of living in Ontario is high and skyrocketing rental costs are creating a city where too many people are living on the edge, or are falling into poverty;

“Whereas many tenants in Ontario are not protected by provincial rent control guidelines, and as a result some Ontarians are seeing their rents arbitrarily increased, and in some cases by arbitrarily large sums;

“Whereas fixing this simple loophole in the law will help protect tenants and help make housing a bit more affordable for thousands of Ontarians;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:

“That the province of Ontario acts to protect tenants in Ontario and immediately moves to ensure that all Ontario tenants living in buildings, mobile home parks and land-lease communities are covered by the rent control guidelines in the Building Code Act, 1992, and the Residential Tendencies Act, 2006.”

I agree with this. I’m going to sign it and give it to Ryan to be delivered to the table.

Electronic bikes

Mr. Arthur Potts: I have here a “Petition for updated and increased regulation of electronic bikes and scooters in the province of Ontario:

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas electronic bikes and scooters (e-bikes) are legal to operate in the province of Ontario; and

“Whereas they are recognized as being environmentally friendly in their responsible use of electricity over gasoline; and

“Whereas they provide a relatively affordable means of transportation relative to automobile ownership, taxis or public transit, and provide a level of independence and mobility to individuals with little or no income, or those living on pensions; and

“Whereas the number of e-bikes on Ontario roads has increased significantly since the initial pilot program in 2009; and

“Whereas there appears to be confusion among the operators of e-bikes, gas-powered scooters and mopeds on what rules and laws apply to their safe and responsible use—including driving on sidewalks, driving the wrong way, ignoring street signs and traffic lights, and driving in pedestrian crosswalks; and

“Whereas the size and weight of e-bikes makes them an injury risk, despite being restricted to moving at slower speeds than automobiles and bicycles; and

“Whereas the increased use of e-bikes will likely continue over the near-term;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:

“That the Minister of Transportation conduct a review of the Highway Traffic Act with the goal of regulating e-bikes and e-scooters as motorized vehicles, subject to the same laws as electronic or hybrid automobiles, including the need for vehicle registration, operator training, insurance, licensing and regular safety inspections.”

I agree with this petition and leave it with Andrew.

Hydro rates

Mr. Randy Pettapiece: I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario about lower hydro rates.

“Whereas household electricity bills have skyrocketed by 56% and” energy “rates have tripled as a result of the Liberal government’s mismanagement of the energy sector;

“Whereas the billion-dollar gas plants cancellation, wasteful and unaccountable spending at Ontario Power Generation and the unaffordable subsidies in the Green Energy Act will result in electricity bills climbing by another 35% by 2017 and 45% by 2020; and

“Whereas the Liberal government wasted $2 billion on the flawed smart meter program; and

“Whereas the recent announcement to implement the Ontario Electricity Support Program will see average household hydro bills increase an additional $137 per year starting in 2016; and

“Whereas the soaring cost of electricity is straining family budgets, and hurting the ability of manufacturers and small businesses in the province to compete and create new jobs; and

“Whereas home heating and electricity are a necessity for families in Ontario who cannot afford to continue footing the bill for the government’s mismanagement of the energy sector;

“Therefore we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to immediately implement policies ensuring Ontario’s power consumers, including families, farmers and employers, have affordable and reliable electricity.”

I agree with this and I will send it down with page Richard.

Partner Assault Response Program

Ms. Peggy Sattler: I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario called “Halt the Changes to Partner Assault Response.”

“Whereas Partner Assault Response (PAR) is the only government-funded program designed to change the behaviours of men who abuse; and

“Whereas the Liberal government has created a crisis in PAR by arbitrarily reducing the length of the program from 16 weeks to 12 weeks, without any research to support this change; and

“Whereas the changes to PAR were made contrary to the advice provided to the government by violence-against-women experts, front-line agencies, PAR providers, and provincial leaders across the sector; and

“Whereas the 2009 report of the Domestic Violence Advisory Council recommended that PAR be enhanced to include voluntary access and differentiated interventions as part of a comprehensive strategy to end violence against women;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:

“That the Ministry of the Attorney General immediately halt the changes to PAR until a comprehensive review of the program can be conducted based on full and meaningful consultation with PAR providers and violence-against-women sector organizations and agencies.”

I couldn’t agree more. I affix my name to it and will give it to page Tristan to take to the table.

Lung disease

Mrs. Kathryn McGarry: I’ve got another petition here, and it comes from folks in Oakville, Mississauga and Milton. It’s addressed to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario.

“Whereas lung disease affects more than 2.4 million people in the province of Ontario, more than 570,000 of whom are children;

“Of the four chronic diseases responsible for 79% of deaths (cancers, cardiovascular diseases, lung disease and diabetes) lung disease is the only one without a dedicated province-wide strategy;

“In the Ontario Lung Association report, Your Lungs, Your Life, it is estimated that lung disease currently costs the Ontario taxpayers more than $4 billion a year in direct and indirect health care costs, and that this figure is estimated to rise to more than $80 billion seven short years from now;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:

“To allow for deputations on” the “private member’s bill, Bill 41, Lung Health Act, 2014, which establishes a Lung Health Advisory Council to make recommendations to the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care on lung health issues and requires the minister to develop and implement an Ontario Lung Health Action Plan with respect to research, prevention, diagnosis and treatment of lung disease; and

“Once debated at committee, to expedite” through “to seek royal assent immediately upon its passage.”

I agree with the petition, sign my name and give it to Suzanne to take down.

Employment supports

Mr. Norm Miller: I have a petition to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario. It reads:

“Whereas the government announced the cancellation of the Ontario Self-Employment Benefit (OSEB) program on May 15, 2015;

“Whereas this program has helped thousands of men and women who were unemployed and unable to find sustaining employment to become successful entrepreneurs;

“Whereas clients of this program have had a much higher probability of five-year survival than average businesses of similar size starting without help in Canada;

“Whereas these results have had a large positive economic impact in the province;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows:

“To reverse the decision to cancel the OSEB program.”

I fully support this petition.

Mental health and addiction services

Ms. Teresa J. Armstrong: “To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas mental illness affects people of all ages, educational and income levels, and cultures; and

“Whereas one in five Canadians will experience a mental illness in their lifetime and only one third of those who need mental health services in Canada actually receive them; and

“Whereas mental illness is the second leading cause of human disability and premature death in Canada; and

“Whereas the cost of mental health and addictions to the Ontario economy is $34 billion; and

“Whereas the Select Committee on Mental Health and Addictions made 22 recommendations in their final report; and

“Whereas the Improving Mental Health and Addictions Services in Ontario Act, 2015, seeks to implement all 22 of these recommendations;

“We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to pass the Improving Mental Health and Addictions Services in Ontario Act, 2015, which:

“

(1) Brings all mental health services in the province under one ministry, the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care;

“

(2) Establishes a single body to design, manage and coordinate all mental health and addictions systems throughout the province;

“

(3) Ensures that programs and services are delivered consistently and comprehensively across Ontario;

“

(4) Grants the Ombudsman full powers to audit or investigate providers of mental health and addictions services in Ontario.”

I fully support this petition and give it to page Tristan to deliver.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): Sorry to have to say, but that concludes the time we have available for petitions this afternoon.

Orders of the Day

Supporting Ontario’s First Responders Act (Posttraumatic Stress Disorder), 2016 / Loi de 2016 d’appui aux premiers intervenants de l’Ontario (état de stress post-traumatique)

Mr. Flynn moved second reading of the following bill:

Bill 163,

An Act to amend the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, 1997 and the Ministry of Labour Act with respect to posttraumatic stress disorder / Projet de loi 163, Loi modifiant la Loi de 1997 sur la sécurité professionnelle et l’assurance contre les accidents du travail et la

Loi sur le ministère du Travail relativement à l’état de stress post-traumatique.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ted Arnott): I recognize the Minister of Labour to lead off the debate.

Hon. Kevin Daniel Flynn: It is a pleasure to rise today on a bill such as this. I’d like to say right from the outset I’ll be sharing my time with my own parliamentary assistant, the member from Eglinton–Lawrence.

I stand with some pride today to lead off second reading debate for Bill 163.

We all know that Ontario’s first responders protect our communities with pride and diligence, and I’ve said before many times—and other people around this House have certainly agreed with me and expressed the same sentiment—that it appears within our first responders’ community that the first word in their vocabulary appears to be “action.” When they rush into that burning building or when they pull that child from a car on the QEW in a traffic accident, or they respond to a crime perhaps or they subdue an inmate or even calm an explosive situation in our corrections facilities, what these people do on our behalf is they put their own physical and mental safety at risk.

When a first responder suffers a physical injury, it’s quite evident; you can see it. There’s bleeding; there’s bruising, there are signs of trauma, and if WSIB is needed in that regard, we have those benefits in place and the process to have that approved is pretty clear and is a relatively easy one. In most cases, it’s very straightforward. A physical injury is very easy to diagnose, as I said. It’s quite visible and you can easily relate that to a work-related incident.

What’s a little tougher is when you’re trying to apply that same discipline, that same evidence to psychological injuries in the workplace. Psychological injuries in the workplace have been tremendously underestimated by governments all around the world for a long time, and just as the research is being done and more information is coming to light about the impact that anxiety, depression or some of the other mental illnesses can have on a person in the workplace, the issue of PTSD is one that has been ignored by this society for far too long.

Often, in the past, it was associated with people who had served in the Armed Forces. It wasn’t always called PTSD; it wasn’t always called post-traumatic stress disorder.

I think people who had a relative who served in the First World War, for example, might say that granddad doesn’t talk about the war much or, “If I ask granddad a question about the war, he doesn’t really want to talk about it.” Then, when we got to the Second World War and the Korean theatre, people started talking about it in terms of shell shock. I think there was a realization there was a causal relation between the trauma that someone in the armed services had experienced and the impact it had on their lives when they tried to return to society. The armed services around the world and in Canada attempted to come to grips with that.

As a result of this, I’ve had the privilege of meeting on a number of occasions with former Senator Roméo Dallaire. If there’s a person in this country that has led the charge on this issue, I think it’s been him. As a man that served his country, put his life on the line, saw atrocities in Africa that we could only imagine, came back to Canada and began to talk about what he had seen, the impact that it had on him and also the impact that it had on his colleagues, those men and women that he served with in the armed services—he puts the issue under your nose and he makes you deal with it.

He’s not gentle in his comments at all—he’s very factual—but you can tell he certainly has the best interests of those people that he served with in the Canadian Armed Forces right at the front of his thoughts when he’s talking to people about PTSD.

PTSD is a very serious, debilitating injury, and there are different types of symptoms to it. We also started to realize, as a result of what we were seeing in the armed services, that some of the same symptoms that accompany PTSD were also impacting upon those people who are first responders. These are the people that we would know as our paramedics, our corrections officers, our firefighters and, of course, our police officers. We ask them to go into situations that we either prefer to think do not exist, or just simply that we don’t feel equipped to do ourselves.

Sometimes we don’t appreciate the situations we’re sending people into. These could be from police services that are in the employ of regions, of local government, of the OPP itself, or of the RCMP, at the federal level. These folks calm violent situations; they often go into situations where they put their own life on the line.

This can cause symptoms. They can include the re-experiencing, for example, of an event or a series of events. Post-traumatic stress disorder sufferers can endure very negative moods and cognitive difficulties, such as the loss of memory. In severe cases, it manifests itself in increased reactivity, aggression, recklessness, or even sometimes, regrettably and unfortunately, it can cause people to decide to end their own life.

Every working person in Ontario is covered by the WSIB. If you work for a company that is covered by the WSIB, you are covered for traumatic mental stress. You’re covered for post-traumatic stress disorder.

However, as with other injuries, there’s a claim process that you have to go through to obtain that coverage and to ensure that coverage is valid, and that can be very, very challenging for somebody who is going through post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms. Under our current system, a worker that’s suffering from traumatic mental stress that has a diagnosis such as PTSD must prove to the WSIB that the injury is, in fact, work-related. What this often asks the individual to do is to relive the incident, sometimes over and over and over again, as the evidence is being collected. That could have the impact of actually increasing the trauma that’s associated with the disorder.

Then there’s the wait time, as the claim is being processed, as the claim is going through the normal process that a claim would go through. There’s a period of time for adjudication, and that period of time sometimes could be very, very valuable time to somebody that is dealing with PTSD. Now, what we’ve been able to find to date—and the research is coming in on a daily basis—is that the people in our society that we refer to as first responders are at least twice as likely, compared to the general population, to suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder.

That simply is due to the risk of that frequent exposure we have to the triggers of traumatic stresses that are at the root of post-traumatic stress disorder. Exposure can come from a number of areas.

It can come from just ordinary things in the daily event of doing their jobs, protecting our communities, but I don’t think there’s anybody in this House who would not agree that if these folks get injured, if our first responders find themselves in a position that they’ve injured themselves either physically or mentally, we need to provide those first responders with exactly the same support and exactly the same service they provide us when we need them the most.

That is really what is at the heart of Bill 163. If passed by this House—and I certainly hope that happens, and I hope it happens in quick order—the legislation is going to provide a sense of security to first responders in the province of Ontario. As I mentioned previously, I don’t want anybody to misunderstand that. Every working person in Ontario covered by the WSIB is covered for post-traumatic stress disorder. But because our first responders are twice as likely to get PTSD, what Bill 163 would do is it would create a presumption that PTSD diagnosed in first responders is actually as a result of the workers’ employment and their claim to WSIB would be accepted very quickly.

What that allows for is that early identification, by a psychiatrist or by a psychologist, which we know is so important to mental health diagnosis. It also allows for the early intervention—it allows for the individuals themselves, or the association or the government or the employer or the WSIB—to take place so that things can start to happen very quickly. What that leads to is that very early treatment that everybody says is so important to the outcome of anybody dealing with an issue such as PTSD.

We spent a good amount of time preparing this bill. We did that for a reason. We knew that presumptive legislation is what would deal with people who already had PTSD and those who are likely to get PTSD in the future. It would allow us to deal with that. But, Speaker, in a sense, you could look at that as a failure, because what you’re saying is that PTSD at this point in time is incurable. It can be managed, you can cope with PTSD much better, but the expert research that I’m getting today tells me at this point in time—and hopefully this changes very soon—that the disorder does not have a cure.

Once you have it, you deal with it, to some degree, for the rest of your life. Some of the outcomes can be very positive, though. You can deal with it, you can manage it properly and you can live a relatively normal life.

But that just drives home the point that as much as presumptive legislation is important, what you really want to do is make sure that people don’t get PTSD in the first place. You need to do everything you possibly can to ensure that doesn’t happen.

The professions we have looked at, the police officers, the firefighters, the paramedics, the emergency medical attendants, the correctional officers, youth service workers in our secure facilities, the dispatchers of police, firefighter and ambulance services, and, of course, our First Nations emergency response team—when you look at each and every one of them, you realize there are things that can be done within the organizations themselves to build resiliency in those people, to do the debriefs after particularly bad circumstances or when they’ve been out to a bad call, to get everybody together to talk about it.

It’s often the colleagues, it’s often the people themselves, who see the change in the individual that could lead to the diagnosis, that could lead to the person taking some action themselves and deciding that perhaps they do need some treatment.

What we’re saying is that both are important. The preventive side—we’re covering that off, I think, in the right way. What we’re doing is we’re putting tools online so that you can be the smallest fire department in small-town Ontario—I want you to have access to exactly the same information that the city of Toronto has or the city of Hamilton has or Oakville has or the larger, more sophisticated fire departments, police detachments; smaller correctional facilities, for example. We want everybody in Ontario who is a first responder to have access to the most up-to-date information. That’s why we’re putting the online tool in.

As we led up to my introduction of Bill 163, last year, as a result of what first responders told us—they said, “You know, you really need to get all the biggest and brightest minds on PTSD together in Toronto.” They didn’t say Toronto, but it seemed to be the sensible place to do it.

So what we did is we invited some of the most outstanding academics and we invited people from associations. Our guest speaker was former Senator Roméo Dallaire, and if you’ve heard him speak about PTSD, he doesn’t give you a choice to deal with it; he tells you you’ll deal with it and then he’ll tell you how you will deal with it, or the best way to deal with it. He does it with such charm that it seems like you’re doing it because you want to do it, and that, I think, is how we all should feel about this.

We had the summit, and people left that day. It was a day-long summit, and people talked to each other. The armed services came, police came, fire came, corrections came, organized labour came and academia came. Everybody told us what they knew about PTSD and what they were doing within their own organizations. That was a day well spent. It was so well spent and the feedback has been so positive that they’ve asked us to do this on an annual basis.

They’ve asked the Ministry of Labour if they would host that summit on an annual basis because we see emerging trends in this field. It’s changing, and the ground is shifting under our feet in a positive way. We’re learning more and more about PTSD, so let’s get that information out to as many organizations and let’s have a sharing of best practises. That was something that we certainly were quite pleased to do and will continue to do, as part of our preventive program on this.

Speaker, research is so important. Research from around the world is telling us things about post-traumatic stress disorder that we simply haven’t dealt with in the past. We simply haven’t known the impact of PTSD, and we simply haven’t realized the things we can do about PTSD. That is changing, and it’s changing, as I said, in a very, very positive way.

In the past decade, we’ve been able to reduce the incidence of health-related incidents, accidents, fatalities by about 40% in the province of Ontario. Ontario is the safest place in all of North America to work. We should all be proud of that, but we shouldn’t be satisfied with that, because we still have incidents that take place. A reduction of over 40% in that period of time is something that we should aspire to in the treatment of PTSD as well. If we can reduce the incidence of PTSD in this province by 40% over the next period of time, we will have served our first responders very, very well.

Those are some of the things we have done from a preventive perspective. The one thing you’ll be hearing about in about a month to six weeks is a digital awareness program and educational program that will be airing on the radio and on the digital media. While it’s aimed at first responders, there’s a message for all of us: The rising interest and appreciation of the impact of mental illness, both on our families and on individuals, and on the economy, is something that we need to pay much more attention to.

When you look at some of the figures, when you look at some of the impacts, it’s absolutely staggering. The number one cost of disability programs for employers in Canada isn’t physical injuries or physical illness; it’s mental illness. It’s something where employers—smart employers—are starting to realize that if they do a better job, it means that they’ll have better employees, less absenteeism and less presenteeism. It’s nothing but good things for the economy for those companies that get a grip on this issue very, very early. We’re starting to see that.

The one obviously that would jump off the page, without picking on one in a favourable way, is the work that Bell Canada has been able to do in this regard, to put mental illness right on the forefront when it comes to public interest.

The diagnosis of PTSD would have to be made by either a psychiatrist as we define a psychiatrist in the Mental Health Act, or a psychologist who is a member of the College of Psychologists of Ontario, but also it can be a person that’s authorized to practice psychology in another province or in another territory of Canada. We’re hoping that those services are made available.

We realized some best practices when I’ve been talking to people about this issue, and I want to just take a second to highlight what they did in the region of Durham with their police services. It’s very progressive, Speaker. As part of their collective agreement, if you’re an employee of the police services in Durham, you have unlimited access to psychological services. That means that if you need to go six days a week, 52 weeks of the year, it’s covered. It’s part of the collective agreement.

And what I’m told is that even though it’s in the collective agreement and a negotiation takes place at the expiry of each of the terms of that agreement, the employer would not get rid of that provision if they could, because they see the value in it. The other day, at the same time I was making the announcement on Bill 163, I also heard that somebody else is going to adopt that very, very soon as well. I don’t know which service it is.

Certainly, I think when employers start to realize that prevention is the way to go, that quick intervention is the way to go—it just makes sense. It just makes you think there’s some hope that employers and the general public, first responders—everybody is starting to understand that this is an issue we need to come to grips with in a very comprehensive way.

Bill 163 is part of a comprehensive strategy. It has the preventive side to it, and it’s also dealing with the respect and dignity that our first responders deserve, should they unfortunately end up with the symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder.

There’s nothing like a little transparency and a little sunlight to make sure that