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

March 8, 2021

42nd Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcript 2021-Mar-08 (PDF)

L232 - Mon 8 Mar 2021 / Lun 8 mar 2021

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Monday 8 March 2021 Lundi 8 mars 2021

Private Members’ Public Business

Internet access / Accès à l’Internet

Orders of the Day

Protecting Ontario Elections Act, 2021 / Loi de 2021 sur la protection des élections en Ontario

Members’ Statements

International Women’s Day

International Women’s Day

Walter Gretzky

COVID-19 response

International Women’s Day

Sexual violence and harassment

International Women’s Day

COVID-19 immunization

Human trafficking

International Women’s Day

Walter Gretzky

Question Period

COVID-19 immunization

COVID-19 immunization

Land use planning

International Women’s Day

Land use planning

COVID-19 response

Broadband infrastructure

Education funding

Personal support workers

Pipelines

COVID-19 response

COVID-19 immunization

COVID-19 immunization

Child care

Housing

Private members’ public business

Deferred Votes

Internet access / Accès à l’Internet

Reports by Committees

Standing Committee on Estimates

Introduction of Bills

Battle of the Hatpins Day Act, 2021 / Loi de 2021 sur le Jour de la bataille des épingles à chapeau

Viewer Discretion Act (Images of Fetuses), 2021 / Loi de 2021 sur les envois sous pli discret (images de foetus)

Stopping Harassment and Abuse by Local Leaders Act, 2021 / Loi de 2021 visant à mettre fin au harcèlement et aux abus commis par les dirigeants locaux

Statements by the Ministry and Responses

International Women’s Day

Pipelines

International Women’s Day

Pipelines

International Women’s Day / Journée internationale des femmes

International Women’s Day

Petitions

Internet access

Abortion images

Workplace Safety and Insurance Board

Human trafficking

Opposition Day

Workplace safety

Orders of the Day

Concurrence in supply

Protecting Ontario Elections Act, 2021 / Loi de 2021 sur la protection des élections en Ontario

The House met at 0900.

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

Prayers.

Private Members’ Public Business

Internet access / Accès à l’Internet

Mr. Michael Mantha: I move that, in the opinion of this House, the Ford government should develop a COVID-19 Internet strategy that focuses on rate relief for increased Internet usage in northern and rural communities, removes the provincial portion of the HST from residential and small business users, and helps ensure that no Ontarian loses access to Internet service during the pandemic.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I am pleased to recognize the member for Algoma–Manitoulin to lead off the debate. You have 12 minutes for your presentation.

Mr. Michael Mantha: It is always an honour to take my place and speak on behalf of the good people of Algoma–Manitoulin, particularly on today’s discussion, which will bring faster, reliable and affordable Internet.

Today, I am bringing forward a motion that focuses on three main themes. First, I’m calling on this government to develop a strategy that will offer rate relief for increased Internet usage in northern and rural communities. It’s no secret that we don’t have many options when it comes to Internet providers, and services can be very limited depending on where you live.

It wouldn’t be so bad if prices were competitive. But unfortunately, some people have to pay hundreds of dollars a month in Internet costs—and that’s not an exaggeration. Costs were already high before the pandemic, but now that people have no choice but to use Internet to continue working or studying, it becomes very difficult not to be forced to spend that extra money.

Some members in this House must be thinking that I’m exaggerating, but I am not. I have seen those bills, and many of those calls and concerns come through my office. Throughout this year, my office has regularly received calls and emails from people with insane Internet bills.

In many other parts of the province, where you have healthy competition between telecommunication companies, you can find a good deal for unlimited Internet. You can easily find it for under $100—some as low as $70. But for too many people in northern and rural communities, that’s just an impossible dream.

It’s actually very frustrating to see this government constantly re-announcing broadband funding. Some announcements are even recycled from the Liberal days—not surprising, but yes, frustrating.

My colleagues and I from the official opposition keep sending all those letters asking many questions and highlighting those high costs, and nothing really comes of it. This government keeps repeating how committed they are to connecting Ontarians to Internet, but again, nothing happens. People can’t wait any longer—not my constituents, and I can wait no longer, Speaker.

The CRTC in 2016 said that high-speed Internet was essential—2016, Speaker. That’s quite a while ago. Communities on the north shore of Lake Huron and on Manitoulin island are developing their own local network. Wiikwemkoong First Nation is doing the same. The Dubreuilville project is also well under way. There’s also a group out of the Ottawa region, EORN, that is also pushing Internet connectivity in their area.

But why has it become the responsibility of municipalities to connect their residents and communities to Internet? Why have both federal and provincial governments failed people in northern and rural communities? Why is it the responsibility of underfunded communities to support their citizens in that way, and why are they already doing a better job than the province? Again, I’m not shocked.

The increasing need for better Internet connection is nothing new, and consecutive Liberal and Conservative governments knew telecommunication would not invest in rural and northern communities because there’s not a critical mass of customers that would justify making the important investment. So why didn’t the government step up, knowing all of that? New Democrats have been asking for broadband investments for many, many years now, Speaker.

Not having proper broadband is a brake to the economic development of northern Ontario communities and rural communities. We are much more in a remote area and isolated. We need Internet to renew our communities and keep businesses alive. This Conservative government agrees in principle that broadband is an essential service, and I’m glad we can agree on that. They’ve actually voted in favour of the member from Timiskaming–Cochrane’s bill, the Broadband is an Essential Service Act. But that was last fall, and it moved to the committee stage, and right now nothing is happening and it’s collecting dust on a shelf.

Why is the government moving so slowly? Is it not urgent enough? How do we—after waiting long enough to receive the same basic service that urban centres and southern Ontario have enjoyed for probably over a decade now. New Democrats believe Internet is an essential service, and therefore it is the responsibility of the government to ensure that all people have access to affordable and reliable Internet service in communities that have not been included in the expanded broadband network.

This need is more real than ever with the pandemic still raging on. After multiple lockdowns and stay-at-home orders, people are frustrated not to have basic Internet and at an affordable cost. People have no choice but to use overpriced Internet services that are lower quality. People have to continue to work, study, see their doctor and connect with family and relatives. That’s why I’m calling on the government, in the spirit of equitable access to essential services, to develop a strategy aimed at rate relief for people in northern and rural communities who are paying far too much for Internet right now because they have no other option, Speaker.

We’ve seen many other similar programs being developed throughout the last year since the pandemic started with people. This government has even adopted a similar strategy that was copied from the Liberals before them to keep hydro rates artificially low. Rate relief would help people afford their Internet costs, because right now, too many families have to limit Internet consumption not to pay too much. Obviously, unlimited Internet is almost never an option in rural and northern communities.

Would you really want to limit your Internet consumption when you have two children at home who have to do e-learning because of an outbreak in their school or because we had to go into lockdown once again? Would you really want to limit your Internet consumption when the only way to keep your business afloat is to transfer operations online? Would you really want to limit your Internet consumption when you fall ill and the only way to see your doctor is online?

I don’t think anyone here wants to worry about how much it’s going to cost them at the end of the month, in the middle of a pandemic, to ensure they keep having Internet.

Speaker, in addition to rate relief, my motion also calls on the government to take out the provincial portion of the HST on Internet bills. This would allow for an immediate 8% reduction on rates, which many people in this province really need. This government could offer rate relief overnight if they wanted to. Considering that Internet is an essential utility, we don’t think this is a wild idea. We’ve asked for similar measures in the past, with natural gas and with hydro.

Immediate help: That’s what people are looking for. I’m glad that the Minister of Infrastructure presented a new bill supporting broadband and infrastructure expansion, but that’s not going to help anyone right now. I’m glad we’ve pushed the government enough on broadband issues that it’s still enough on their mind to present legislation, but that should have been done years ago. This should have been done in the first bill that they would have introduced, instead of remodelling Toronto city council or paving through the greenbelt.

Since January, they were able to secure new, affordable cell phone plans, adding 28 gigs per month on top of the 60 gigs per month they have with their provider, and thankfully, their two boys are old enough to understand the limitations they have to implement while saving their gigs. During the month their two boys were doing e-learning from home, they often ended up paying an additional $20 to $50 a month on top of their fees, plus HST, to compensate for the overcharges on their Internet.

These overcharges were incurred despite the fact that they frequently walked down to their schoolyard, which is approximately two kilometres away from their house, to access the WiFi from their schoolyard. The unfortunate reality is that some people just can’t afford to keep paying these crazy Internet bills. Month after month, the costs keep going up.

The third and final part of my motion is that the government needs to help ensure that no Ontarian loses access to Internet services during a pandemic. Just as no one should have lost their hydro or received a disconnection notice in the middle of winter, no one should lose their Internet connection in the middle of a pandemic because of our reliance on the essential services that it provides to each and every home and to our businesses. To be able to work or study or stay in touch with people these days, you need Internet. It’s not a luxury.

When families like the Maltaises—and they’re not the only family across this province who experience these forces, these challenges and these hardships in order to keep their kids to continue e-learning from home; to continue with their business; to continue with their employers, working from home.

Speaker, I hope this House understands the importance of this motion. I want to take the time to reiterate the points of the motion: It’s to deal with the higher Internet costs and to develop a strategy for northern and rural communities, to provide overall rate relief. People need help at this time. This government can step up and take the immediate HST off of home Internet use. That’s an immediate 8%, and also that we stop and we make sure that Internet connections continue for people while we’re in a pandemic. Speaker, we can do something today. Let’s do it.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Lisa Gretzky): Further debate?

Mr. Jamie West: I want to thank the member from Algoma–Manitoulin for this motion. It’s a very important motion, as he had explained.

I want to talk for a minute—I was looking at different stats, and I know I can’t pull the page up because it would be a prop, but I was looking at broadband Internet coverage availability across Canada. It shows the broadband availability on a heat map, and Ontario basically looks like somebody with a 5-o’clock shadow. All along southern Ontario, there is a large dark colour showing lots of broadband opportunity and connectivity. In northern Ontario, as you go farther north, areas like Sudbury are fairly good because of the large urban centre, but as you go farther north, basically you can’t see any colour at all. That’s the reality for northern Ontario, that you don’t have those choices.

As an example, Speaker, this morning, Nicole from my office just sent me a text: “We don’t have Internet today.” Last week, we didn’t have Internet for two days. I can hit the ISP with a tennis ball from my office. We lost Internet for two days; I don’t know how many days today. We lost Internet about six times since October, and that’s not unusual in the north.

Last summer, Speaker, I had Zoom meetings. We had over 300 Zoom meetings with non-profits and businesses. I did it from our camp in southern Ontario—those are cottages—using my in-laws’ Internet. I had one three-hour Zoom meeting. I used their capacity for the full day. I spent over $60 of their money in one Zoom meeting, and we had to pay in to get more gigs for it, and that’s not affordable.

Right now in Sudbury, Collège Notre-Dame is closed because of COVID cases. They closed down the school to protect the students—the right move. Many of those students, though, will bus in from more rural areas such as Noëlville, where our camp is. How do these parents afford to have their kids in school? How do they afford the connectivity? If one three-hour Zoom call used up your entire quota for the month, how will you have your kids be in school for two weeks remotely? And those are the people who have access to Internet; there is a bunch of people who have no Internet at all.

The final thing I want to talk about, because I want to give time for other speakers, is business. Very often here, the sort of buzzword is that we “move with the speed of business.” Imagine if one Zoom call were to shut you down after three hours. Imagine the cost to your business. Imagine not having any Internet at all. Imagine having unreliable Internet like at my office, where it keeps shutting down. Imagine how fast business moves when you can’t compete with other people, because you don’t have any connectivity at all. That’s the speed of business.

I 100% want to thank the member for Algoma–Manitoulin for this really important motion that we need to ensure that northern Ontario has access to reliable Internet and to high-speed Internet. It’s just the reality of the world. It is an essential service and we have to make this happen, Speaker.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Lisa Gretzky): Further debate?

Mr. Sol Mamakwa: I’m pleased to be here this morning to speak on my colleague’s motion to lower Internet bills for people across the north, and to improve Internet service.

I think we have to be honest that we’ve learned lessons over the past year that we’ve been living with COVID-19. The first is that nothing is more important than our collective health as people. The second is, it’s really hard to work and learn remotely without proper Internet. I know it’s very clear in the riding of Kiiwetinoong, because we have been attempting to work and learn without this infrastructure for years.

I have written to the Minister of Infrastructure as recently as October about Internet to First Nations in the Kiiwetinoong riding and the severely limited Internet connectivity that is very common across northern Ontario.

I know that reliable and affordable Internet is essential to ensure students can access virtual learning, and it is especially important to the delivery of telehealth in fly-in communities, such as the 23 First Nations in Kiiwetinoong that can only be accessed by plane or winter road. That’s a reality in our communities.

One of the things the COVID-19 pandemic has shown us is the divide in rural and northern communities. It has shone a light on how inefficient and unaffordable Internet is outside urban areas. Access to affordable Internet should not be a privilege; it should be an essential service to our everyday lives.

I believe this motion is a good opportunity to demonstrate your government’s commitment to ensuring the delivery of affordable and reliable connectivity to all fly-in First Nations communities in the north. The health and the success of our schools, health centres, businesses depend on it.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Lisa Gretzky): Further debate?

M me France Gélinas: I am so proud of the motion that my colleague from Algoma–Manitoulin brought forward. I live in a northern rural area, so I decided to bring my Internet bill for your enjoyment this morning.

Where I live, you have a choice of Xplornet, which is through the satellite—they put this great big dish on your roof. I used to have Xplornet. After too many people went on it, the service was just horrible, so we gave that up. We’re back to Bell through the phone line. Bell through the phone line will cost you $69 a month for 25 gigs. I was able to buy an extra 40 gigs for $5, but if I go over those, then the fees are astronomical.

Let me walk you through: $69.95 will give you 25 gigs. That’s an average of $2.92 a gig. I’m able to buy an extra 40 gigs for $5. So those extra 40 gigs cost me 13 cents a gig to buy. But God forbid you go over what you’re able to buy. Then Bell charges me—charges everybody—$4 a gig.

For the month of January, when there was a shutdown in Sudbury, I worked from home for the whole time. I used 24.46 extra gigs, versus what I pay for, and it cost me an extra $97.84 for 24 gigs. That’s $4 a gig, for a total for that month of $189.60 for my Internet, and I was really, really careful not to use too much. Nobody watches Netflix or Crave or anything like this in my house, because you can’t afford it because of the surcharge.

What we’re asking is, if Bell can sell me an extra 40 gigs for 13 cents a gig, why is it allowed to charge me $4 a gig when I go over? The Premier has talked about stopping gouging. This is Bell gouging every single northern and rural resident, and the motion from my colleague would stop this. I hope you’ll all agree.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Lisa Gretzky): Further debate?

Mr. Dave Smith: I’m happy to rise today on International Women’s Day and talk about something with respect to the Internet, because most people wouldn’t recognize this. You’ve probably never heard this woman’s name before: Elizabeth Feinler. The Internet as we know it today would not exist had it not been for this woman.

There are probably some of you watching this streaming right now on the Legislative website, ola.org. Why do I bring that up? Elizabeth Feinler was the director of network information systems for Stanford University in the 1980s. Her centre is responsible for domain name resolution, that protocol that takes a simple, common name and translates it to an IP address. Can you imagine having to type in 151.101.138.133 to get to www.ola.org? Most people wouldn’t be able to do that, because you wouldn’t remember that.

If you want to send an email to my Gmail account, davesmith@gmail.com, without Elizabeth Feinler, it would be davesmith@172.217.1.5. Elizabeth Feinler is someone, a woman in technology, who made the world better for all of us, with the Internet.

When I took a look at the member’s motion, I thought: This is almost like French Impressionist art, something that may have come from Monet. From a distance, it’s very, very elegant. It looks great. But as we get closer and closer to the details, we realize that it’s much more blurred and it’s not as easy to see.

What the member is asking for is something that is completely outside of the jurisdiction of the Ontario government. We all know that the CRTC is the federal government agency that oversees Internet, phone, TV and broadband service rates, so to ask for changes, for the Ontario government to make changes to those, knowing it is completely outside of our jurisdiction—it’s not something that we’re able to do.

I understand that broadband Internet is something that is very important to a large number of people. I, myself, represent a riding that has an urban and a rural component to it. I live less than five minutes from the city of Peterborough, and yet I do not have stable high-speed Internet, nor do I have stable cellphone service. I have three cellphones: my personal cellphone, my constituency cellphone and my ministry cellphone. They’re with different providers. If I’m standing on the deck at the front of my house, my personal cellphone works.

If I go to the backyard, my personal cellphone no longer works, but my constituency cellphone works. Nowhere in my home does my ministry cellphone work. I do not have Internet access with my ministry cellphone; I do not have cellphone access with my ministry cellphone. I understand the challenges.

The member brought up the EORN project. This is something that I have been involved in, in a number of meetings. We are doing what we need to do as the province of Ontario to support that high-speed Internet being brought to eastern Ontario. He mentioned that it was for Ottawa. It covers a lot more than just Ottawa; it goes all the way to Lindsay and slightly beyond. It goes up north to Apsley, to Bancroft. It’s eastern Ontario. It’s basically from Ottawa to Oshawa and north—755,000 people. It’s something that we are actively working on right now, to provide high-speed Internet, broadband Internet, to all of those people. We are actively working on it.

The member has brought up as well that we need to be taking the provincial portion of the HST out, which is really interesting, because “HST” stands for “harmonized sales tax,” and it is administered by the federal CRA. It requires a negotiation with the federal government to remove anything from it, because it’s actually the federal government that administers that tax. It’s the federal government, then, that would have to be responsible for making any changes to it. It’s not something that the Ontario Legislature can stand up and say, “We’re just going to do this,” because we do not have the power unilaterally to do that.

Our government continues to call on the federal government, though, to step up to the plate and fully fund broadband here in Ontario. The federal government has a universal broadband component to it. They’re offering $1.4 billion to all of Canada. Here at the Ontario Legislature, though, we’re offering $1 billion to improve high-speed Internet across all of Ontario, and we’ve stepped up to fill the funding divide.

We’re providing funding, as I said, to EORN and to SWIFT, and we’ve started our own province-wide broadband program called ICON. We’re looking for better ways to deliver what really is a federal government responsibility, because we can’t sit back and wait. We’ve taken that initiative. We started that initiative last summer. We went out to different areas of Ontario and we said, “We know that we need to have better Internet. We need to have high-speed Internet.

We can’t just rely on satellite technology from other jurisdictions.” We have to make sure that we’re providing the infrastructure that the people of Ontario expect, and that’s what we’ve been doing. We’ve committed to investing $143 billion in Ontario’s infrastructure over the next decade, and that includes broadband connectivity, because we know that if you do not have broadband connectivity, you’re behind.

Back in the early 2000s, Oracle had a campaign that said that if you weren’t in e-business, you’ll be out of business, and what we’re seeing during the pandemic is just that. There is a divide; I freely admit it. Those who have Internet access and those who are able to have e-commerce have been able to get through this pandemic better than those who do not.

We have offered up many supports for it: the main street program, for example, to bring those small businesses that did not have an Internet presence into the digital world, and providing them supports for it. We’ve been able to help a large number of businesses, a large number of small mom-and-pop companies that wouldn’t otherwise have been able to do this. We’ve put our money where our mouth is because we firmly believe that high-speed Internet is something that all of us require.

That’s why we introduced, just last week, the Supporting Broadband and Infrastructure Expansion Act, 2021. If passed, this legislation would help connect communities to reliable, high-speed Internet sooner. We recognize that the federal government—although it is their jurisdiction, although it is their responsibility, they’ve dropped the ball. We need to make sure that we’re accelerating the deployment of provincially significant broadband infrastructure across Ontario, and that is exactly what we are doing.

We’re taking decisive action immediately. We didn’t wait; we started immediately. We started with more than $300 million back in the summer, and then we increased that to $1 billion because we recognized that the only way Ontario is going to be able to move ahead, the only way that Ontario businesses are going to be able to conduct business, post-COVID, effectively, is by having that effective, high-speed Internet across all of Ontario. It’s not something that can be fixed overnight. It’s something that has been lacking for a number of years. But we have started that action.

We’ve made proposed changes to how we would run fibre optic. Right now, it’s cost-prohibitive for a company to enter into an agreement with Hydro One to use their existing infrastructure to put in lightweight fibre optic. In our proposal, we’re changing that, because we recognize that if you’re replacing heavy copper with lightweight fibre-optic, you’re actually extending the life of all of those assets. Less weight means less wear and tear.

Why does that make a difference? Have you ever been in a storm before and seen trees waving, or seen telephone poles or hydro poles waving? Less weight is less strain. We know that lightweight fibre optic is not only the future, but it is the technology of today, and it’s high-speed and it’s expandable.

We know that heavy copper has its limitations. DSL, when it first came out, was something that was remarkable, because you could run it across telephone lines and it was an upgrade from dialup. I’m sure that there are many people watching today that remember those 56K modems, or the 28.8K, or the 14.4K, or even the 1,200-baud modem. That worked on copper. When DSL came out, it advanced Internet technology for all of us.

Now we’re at the next stage, where we’re talking about fibre optic and running fibre optic to everyone, and that is exactly what we are trying to do. We’re doing it with partnerships—partnerships with EORN, partnerships with SWIFT—because we recognize we cannot do it alone. We have the ability to provide financing for some of these projects, but the Ontario government does not have that expertise. We are leaning on and partnering with those who have the expertise to make sure that we can provide high-speed Internet, broadband Internet for today, tomorrow and every day in the future, for every single person in Ontario.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Lisa Gretzky): Further debate?

Mr. Mike Schreiner: It’s a pleasure to rise today to speak to the motion from the member from Algoma–Manitoulin on such a vital issue as ensuring that people have access to broadband services. I fundamentally believe that broadband is an essential service. It should be recognized as an essential service and we should have a strategy in place in this province to make it an essential service.

Ontario has a digital divide; there is no doubt about it. Most people who live in cities have access to reliable broadband Internet—not always affordable, but mostly reliable. A lot of people in rural and remote parts of this province do not even have access to reliable service, let alone affordable service.

Speaker, this motion actually doesn’t say the government has to deliver it right now. It says it has to deliver a strategy right now, and in some cases, that strategy might actually be working with the federal government. I know the members opposite, oftentimes when we have this debate about broadband services, hide behind the federal government, but that does not mean the province does not have a responsibility to ensure that we take care of our jurisdiction and the things that are within our jurisdiction, and that we develop a strategy that deals with the federal components of jurisdiction.

That’s very common, for us to actually develop strategies like that. I don’t buy into this notion that somehow, because it’s regulated federally, we don’t have a role to play here in developing a strategy, and specifically developing a strategy to ensure that people in rural and remote communities have affordable access and are not cut off.

I want to talk about it in three key areas, Speaker. First of all, education: We have a public education system in this province that says that everyone should have access to public education. It’s pretty hard to have access to public education during a pandemic, when things have gone remote and you don’t have access to Internet, and so if we are going to ensure that people have access to the public education they’re entitled to as Ontarians, then we need to ensure they have access to affordable Internet, to access the education that they’re entitled to as citizens, residents of this province.

Secondly is health care, Speaker. We have a universal public health care system that is funded by the public and is accessible to everyone in this province through OHIP. Much of that health care has moved online due to the pandemic. It’s understandable why. It’s especially the case in rural and remote communities. If you don’t have access to the Internet, you don’t have access to health care in many places right now, and so it’s vital that we provide it.

The third point is small businesses. So many small businesses in this province have been asked to close to help contain the virus and support public health measures. When you’ve been forced, by government mandate, to move online, if you don’t have access to the Internet and the tools you need to conduct business online, it’s pretty hard to do what government is asking you to do to meet public health measures.

And so for all three—there are many other reasons, but I think those three are just vital in the limited time I have, Speaker. I can tell you from serving on the SCOFEA, the finance committee, over the summer that looked at economic recovery—and we heard from hundreds of people and thousands of hours of testimony—the number one issue that was brought up, probably—go back and look at the remarks that people made, but I’d say probably the number one issue was Internet: unreliable, unaffordable and inaccessible in many parts of the province.

So I think it’s incumbent upon us to listen to what those people said at committee—many of them small business owners but also a number of them non-profits, educators and others who said that reliable, affordable access to broadband was vital to them getting through life, period, but especially through this pandemic.

I think it’s incumbent upon us as a province to work together to ensure that we have a strategy to deliver. That’s why I’ll be supporting this motion.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Lisa Gretzky): Further debate?

Mr. John Vanthof: It’s always an honour to be able to stand in this House and today speak on the member for Algoma–Manitoulin’s motion on Internet strategy for COVID.

The member’s motion speaks to the overall NDP strategy on providing Internet for Ontarians. Earlier last fall, we put forward—under my name, but the NDP put forward—the Broadband is an Essential Service Act. The goal of that act is to make sure that, at the end of the day, everyone in Ontario has access to broadband.

the federal government and the province are both looking at ways to get broadband to most people. It is a huge issue. But we know that once most people have broadband, the initiatives will slow down and they will stop. And if people say, “Oh, no, that’s not going to happen,” I point to the member for Kiiwetinoong, who has people in his riding who don’t have access to clean water in this province. It’s the same issue: Once almost everyone has it, everyone forgets about those who don’t, and that’s what the Broadband is an Essential Service Act is meant to combat.

The member’s motion is meant to address the issue of the digital divide, where there is access, but they can’t pay for it. For school, for health care, it doesn’t help if it’s there but it’s beyond your capacity to pay.

The member opposite says, “Well, this is federal jurisdiction.” Okay, so the member’s motion said the province should refund the provincial portion of the HST. “That’s not possible.” Actually, you could refund the equivalent of the provincial HST. They could put that in one of their pieces of legislation. There are all kinds of things that could be done. Saying that it’s not possible doesn’t help the kids in ridings, even in the member opposite’s riding, in my riding, in the member’s who put forward this motion, who don’t have access to education because, even where there is Internet, they can’t afford it.

That’s what he’s trying to address. It’s an essential service. Everyone should be able to access it and, equally as important, regardless of your income level, you should be able to afford it. Otherwise, you will always be second-class.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Lisa Gretzky): Back to the member for Algoma–Manitoulin for a wrap-up.

Mr. Michael Mantha: I want to start off by saying thank you to the member from Guelph. You actually took the time to read the motion, which is something that is very much a step in the right direction.

I want to thank the members from Timiskaming–Cochrane, Sudbury and Nickel Belt for your comments. You understand the issues that are being faced here, across the province.

The member from Peterborough–Kawartha: When you were talking, I could always hear this comment that I used to say or hear in this House in the previous government: “Liberal, Tory, same old story.” You pass the buck off to the feds all the time: “Oh, it’s their responsibility. It’s too hard for us to tackle it. It’s not our role, it’s not our position.” I sat with the member from Kiiwetinoong this morning. We had the same exact discussion, when it came to housing and water issues, and the member was here this morning in order to bring this debate to the floor.

To the member from Kiiwetinoong, thank you. You really enlighten me each and every day of my responsibility here in the House, to take on those responsibilities—not to pass the buck. There is a role for us to play, and we are going to take that role seriously and do it. There are so many things that we can do.

I want to reiterate to this government what the motion was. I started with explaining the motion at the beginning, I ended with it and I’m going to end with it again. It’s to develop a COVID-19 Internet strategy focused on rate relief. We can do that. It’s to take the HST off the bills for those that are using Internet. And it’s also to ensure that we do not lose access to Internet services. The only thing missing is the will: Does this government have the will to develop this strategy and help Ontarians?

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Lisa Gretzky): The time provided for private members’ public business has expired.

Mr. Mantha has moved private members’ notice of motion number 142. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? I heard a no.

All those in favour of the motion will please say “aye.”

All those opposed to the motion will please say “nay.”

In my opinion, the nays have it.

Pursuant to standing order 101(d), the recorded division on this item of private members’ public business will be deferred to the proceeding of deferred votes.

Vote deferred.

Orders of the Day

Protecting Ontario Elections Act, 2021 / Loi de 2021 sur la protection des élections en Ontario

Resuming the debate adjourned on March 4, 2021, on the motion for second reading of the following bill:

Bill 254,

An Act to amend various Acts with respect to elections and members of the Assembly / Projet de loi 254, Loi modifiant diverses lois en ce qui concerne les élections et les députés à l’Assemblée.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Lisa Gretzky): Further debate?

Mr. John Vanthof: Again, it’s always an honour to be able to stand in this House and debate legislation that’s brought forward by the government, in this case Bill 254. I read the bill, but I don’t have it right in front of me. It’s basically making changes to the Election Act.

There have been quite a few comments that there are other issues that are perhaps more pressing right now—

Interjection.

Mr. John Vanthof: Oh, thank you very much. The act is

An Act to amend various Acts with respect to elections and members of the Assembly.

There have been comments made on our side that there are more pressing issues, and there are—we are in the middle of a COVID pandemic—but elections are important. Any time that we have to look at changing how elections are done and what the rules are is always important, so I’m happy to be able to stand here and discuss it.

I like to bring things back to a personal level. Everyone sitting here, other than the staff, has been elected. That’s the honour that we get to sit here and to represent our constituents. Our constituents and people across the province have to have faith that elections are freely and fairly held, and that’s not an automatic. That’s a tenuous—it’s something you always have to look for. You always have to make sure that the rules are fair for everyone, and that’s not easy. It’s not an easy job for the Chief Electoral Officer.

He has come out with a report on how to make things better, and there are some good points in that report. There are some points that are reflected in this bill, but some don’t come from the Chief Electoral Officer, and we will get to that a bit later.

In this bill, we increase the number of early voting days. Is that a bad thing? No, not at all.

There is an issue—and this is something that I’m sure every riding, every member and every candidate has had issues with—we also have to make sure that where the polling stations are is equally accessible to all Ontarians, because that isn’t always the case, and that is something that always has to be—so you can have more days, and that’s good, but you have to make sure that, where possible, every neighbourhood has the same, that every person has—you won’t have equal, but equivalent access, because the idea to have more polling days is to make it easier to vote, and that is credible.

I don’t have a problem with that. We should look at, in everything we do, how to make it easier to participate. That’s a good thing.

There are also provisions in this bill regarding third-party advertising. I would say everyone has had issues, on all sides—right, left, blue, orange or red—with the influence of third-party advertisers. We can name specific examples, I would say, and obviously it’s my job to put emphasis on things that happened with the government. I would say that Ontario Proud is a third-party advertiser that influences and that has a certain bent that favours the right—I don’t think that’s a surprise to anyone—and there are other third-party advertisers that have a certain bent that would favour the other side.

The issue, though, now, with the changes to the act and that we will have to flesh out as it proceeds, is: Who is going to decide what is a legitimate third-party advertiser? Now, with long-term care, with the crisis that we’ve had, the tragedies in long-term care, I wouldn’t be surprised if there are people who are going to want to talk about that in the year leading up to the campaign. Are their rights going to be removed under this legislation? I think that’s a legitimate question.

That’s something that needs to be brought forward and needs to be discussed as this bill goes forward, because there’s a difference between third-party advertising to get your political way, or a legitimate group who wants to bring something to the forefront that has been ignored across the years. There’s a difference. And I don’t think I’m the judge of that by myself; that’s something that has to be brought forward legitimately through this process, something we need to do.

I’d say that the most controversial part of this bill—“controversial” is perhaps not the right word. A farmer I am; a wordsmith I’m not. The part of the bill that jumps out to me is—there are two parts: the financial part, so the increase in individual donation ceiling; and the changes to the subsidy parts.

When the public subsidies were brought in, the per-vote subsidies, they were brought in as a response to the Liberal government’s attempt to try and take cash-for-access out of the system, because the Liberals had a big problem with cash-for-access. I don’t think anyone would disagree with me. They had a big problem with cash-for-access. So the per-vote subsidies were put in and corporate and union donations, for example, were taken out. Okay.

The Tories, I believe, at the time when the government first came in, actually, put forward legislation to get rid of the per-vote subsidy. So that’s changed. That’s a marked change on their side. But they’ve increased individual limits.

Now, where that could cause some problems is—remember at the start, I talked about how everyone should have maybe not equal but equivalent access to the system? Well, when you make the individual donation limits high, you have a very large chance to make government for the 1%, not for the 99%. Because it’s probably 1% of the people in Ontario who can afford $3,600 times three, times their family members. All of a sudden, those families and whatever organizations that they belong to, if they have the personal wherewithal to give those donations, could be perceived to have more political influence.

I think you see that coming forward already in government legislation, and I think that’s something that we really need to take seriously and we really need to address seriously as this bill goes to committee.

The government says, “Well, we’re in the middle of the pack of the other provinces.” I’m not so worried about being in the middle of the pack; I’m worried about getting it right. And I’m not sure that that’s getting it right. Because the people who are the PSWs who are making $15, $16 an hour and all the front-line workers that this government claims to support can’t donate $3,600, but some of their bosses can, and that tilts the scales. That perception is very dangerous, and that’s something that we should all be very cognizant of.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Lisa Gretzky): Questions?

Mr. Norman Miller: Thank you to the member from Timiskaming–Cochrane for his comments on the bill. I gather from his comments that he’s in favour of free and fair elections, and it sounded like he was supporting the five additional days of advance polling as long as it’s flexible and able to get to the remote parts of our ridings, which I think is the intention. And he’s supportive of rules on third-party advertising. Of course, you realize, you can still spend over $600,000 for each individual organization in the 12 months before an election and over $100,000 in an election, so there are substantial amounts of money still being spent.

My question, though, is about another recommendation of the Chief Electoral Officer, the administrative monetary penalties for things like exceeding spending limits, failing to register—are you supportive of that recommendation as well?

Mr. John Vanthof: Thank you very much for that question. Just for the first time—COVID has changed us all—I spoke for 10 minutes with a mask; didn’t even know it.

We are in favour of a strong, robust system that everyone trusts, and that system would include regulations and penalties for people who don’t follow them. That is part of the system. If you’re going to have any kind of system—if you’re going to have speed limits but no one enforcing them, the speed limits don’t mean anything. So I think that’s your answer. If you’re going to have regulations, we need to be able to enforce them.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Lisa Gretzky): Questions?

Mr. Jamie West: Thank you to the member for his debate on this. The thing that stands out to me on this bill is raising the max donation—I’ve had more phone calls about this than anything else—especially in the midst of COVID-19, where businesses are losing their business, basically, and employees are being laid off. I believe it’s going to go up to $3,600.

It reminds me, Speaker, 10 years ago, I was in Washington on a tour and one of the senators talked about how about 50% of his work now is fundraising. They have much higher limits in the south than we do here, but it is that slippery slope.

The member talked about cash-for-access with the Liberals. If you make minimum wage, you make about $31,000. That’s your gross, not even your take-home. The new access would be more than 10% of a minimum wage worker’s take-home income.

I’m just wondering, to the member who spoke about this, how do you feel about this, and what has the response been in your community about raising the max donations?

Mr. John Vanthof: Thank you very much to the member for Sudbury. I have gotten calls from lots of small businesses, as, I am sure, has every member in this House. I have had not one small business call me and say, “I need that individual spending limited raised.”

Do you know what I have had lots of businesses call me about? They have called me and asked me, “So how come I’m closed and I sell the same products as Walmart, and how come they’re open?” Maybe this legislation is one of those reasons.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Lisa Gretzky): Questions?

Mr. Robert Bailey: I’ll take my mask off. I’m not used to speaking with it on.

I wanted to speak and ask questions, of course, to the member from Timiskaming–Cochrane. I enjoyed his remarks this morning, even with the mask on.

My question was in regard to elections. The suggestion by the Chief Electoral Officer that we set up a bipartisan commission made up of elected members of all the parties, independents, opposition and, of course, government as well: I’m just wondering what your comments are on that, and what you think could be derived from such a bipartisan committee.

Mr. John Vanthof: I thank the member from Sarnia—and now I’m remembering to take off my mask—for that question. I have had lots of discussions with the Chief Electoral Officer on elections, specifically about rural, because it’s a very rural riding. I think a bipartisan committee that actually acted in a bipartisan way could be very beneficial, but it has to act in a bipartisan way, and not all committees in this Legislature do. But a bipartisan committee would be of benefit to talk about elections, which are in a weird way—they’re the most political thing in the world, but they should be the least.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Lisa Gretzky): Questions?

Mr. Ian Arthur: It’s an honour to rise and ask a question in this debate. I’m always interested, whenever I look at legislation, as to what’s behind it. What are the motivations? Why is the government introducing this particular piece of legislation? Because few times does their rhetoric actually match what the intent of the bill is.

To quote one of my colleagues, the MPP for Waterloo, “You have to follow the money.” When you look at a bill like this, you have to ask: Why is it so important for this government to raise the individual limits for political donations in Ontario? The member from Timiskaming–Cochrane brought up the Liberals’ cash-for-access scandal. Well, we’re creeping back towards that, Speaker. It immediately makes me think of the issues that this government has around MZOs and the developers that are feeding money into the party. Suddenly, they are going to be able to actually feed a lot more money into it.

It’s my understanding that this party, the governing party, is actually still in debt, and the election is imminent.

Would the member for Timiskaming–Cochrane speak to why he thinks this legislation was introduced?

Mr. John Vanthof: I don’t think I can specifically comment on why the legislation was introduced, because I didn’t introduce it. The government did.

But we all know that cash-for-access, at the end of the Liberal regime, was a huge problem. Legislation was brought in by the Liberals to try and stop it.

Interjection: They were embarrassed.

Mr. John Vanthof: Yes, they were embarrassed—a heckle from the government side. They were embarrassed, but we’re creeping back up to there. Because whether it’s a corporate or union donation, or whether it’s a very large personal donation to the riding association, to the campaign, to the party, you’re talking close to $10,000, and by many family members. Again, it seems the perception could be that the access to certain members of certain families—

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Lisa Gretzky): Thank you. Question?

Mr. Will Bouma: I’m glad I can rise and chat with the member from Timiskaming–Cochrane. Just going back to his speech: He made mention of the fact that he was disheartened that the government was extending the per-vote subsidy. As has been mentioned in the House, we understand the difficulty of parties being able to raise money, which is why we are extending this at this point.

So I was wondering, specifically, if I could ask him to directly answer, whether he is for or against the extension of the per-vote subsidy in these difficult COVID times.

Mr. John Vanthof: Thank you for that question. I think we are on the record. We believe that a per-vote subsidy eliminates some of the issues regarding cash-for-access. We have never been opposed to the per-vote subsidy.

The issue is, now that you are raising the individual limits, you’re doing both. Often, members on the other side say that you can’t have either/or. Well, it seems that, on your side, you’re trying to have both. I’m not saying there is cash-for-access, but it’s certainly the perception. It’s starting to creep in that this is looking a lot like “Liberal, Tory, same old story” cash-for-access. That is something that, if I was on the government side, I’d be very worried about, because we saw what happened to the Liberal government when they did that.

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Lisa Gretzky): Further debate?

M. Michael Mantha: C’est tout le temps un plaisir de prendre mon siège ici dans la maison de l’Assemblée et puis de donner une perspective des gens de ma région d’Algoma–Manitoulin, surtout en regard de ce projet de loi que le gouvernement a apporté en avant, le projet 254, la Loi modifiant diverses lois en ce qui concerne les élections et les députés à l’Assemblée. Ceci a été présenté en première lecture le 25 février, et on a commencé à avoir les discussions sur ce projet de loi le 6 mars de la semaine passée.

Ce qui est intéressant, c’est que dans le milieu d’une pandémie où les gens sont en train de poser les questions, « Quand est-ce que je vais avoir mon vaccin? Qu’est-ce qui se passe dans nos maisons de longue durée? Qu’est-ce qui est en train de se passer dans les entreprises où les gens sont en train de perdre leur vie? »—c’est ça les questions que les gens sont en train de poser. Mais ce gouvernement, dans leur position comme gouvernement, apporte ceci comme une priorité.

Je veux questionner la priorité, madame la Présidente, parce que si tu regardes quand on est revenu ici en Chambre, une des grosses priorités de ce gouvernement était de présenter une motion sur comment on fonctionne ici dans la maison. Une de leurs priorités qu’ils sont venus avec dans la maison était le fonctionnement des comités pendant que nous étions levés en maison, pendant que la maison était fermée. Ils voulaient continuer avec ça. Ils voulaient faire un amendement aussi que les mercredis, à la place de commencer à 3 heures de l’après-midi, qu’on commence à 1 heure de l’après-midi.

Puis, une tâche que j’ai donnée aux greffiers ici c’était de me trouver le terme pour un « deferral slip », ce avec quoi ils ont eu de la difficulté, mais c’était une « demande de différer. » Et ça, c’était une des grosses priorités que ce gouvernement avait.

Puis en suivi de ça, ils nous posent et nous présentent une autre priorité que ce gouvernement a, où ils vont augmenter les donations que les gens peuvent faire au système électoral—dans le milieu d’une pandémie.

Vous savez, madame la Présidente, ce qui, vraiment, me bouleverse? Ça me bouleverse comment le gouvernement—et puis je l’ai souvent utilisé : le gouvernement précédent, qui était les libéraux, ils avaient manqué la balle, comment ils n’étaient pas en bonne fonction ou comment ils n’écoutaient pas les gens, non seulement du nord de l’Ontario, mais de la province. Et puis nous voici avec un gouvernement conservateur : leur priorité, c’est d’augmenter les donations électorales pendant une campagne.

Savez-vous—ce n’était pas question, en effet, de comment on fait pour délivrer les vaccins un petit peu plus vite dans nos communautés, de comment on s’assure que les aînés de nos communautés vont recevoir leurs vaccins au bon moment quand ils en ont besoin, immédiatement quand ils en ont besoin. Ce n’est pas vraiment d’adresser les besoins des gens qui travaillent dans des maisons de longue durée. Ce n’est pas ça qui était leur priorité. Leur priorité, comme je vous dis, c’est d’augmenter les donations à un parti politique pendant une campagne électorale.

Vous savez, il faut qu’on regarde comment on s’est rendu à cette situation ici. Il faut qu’on regarde l’histoire. Oui, c’est vrai que c’est arrivé en dessous du gouvernement précédent, où ils ont vraiment développé—il y en avait, de l’accès aux ministres, madame la Présidente; il faut que je vous laisse savoir. C’était incroyable. J’ai utilisé le terme « bouleversé ». Celui-ci, là, c’était de quoi de spécial. Il y avait des gens qui, pour avoir accès à un ministre, payaient jusqu’à 10 000 piastres, pour un morceau de poulet et puis deux ou trois morceaux de légumes pour avoir accès.

Bien, une fois que c’était sorti, c’est certain que les libéraux se sont fait taper sur les mains et puis ont changé la structure. À la place de se punir, juste eux autres mêmes, ils ont décidé de punir toute l’Assemblée et puis tous les députés et puis tout le système électoral.

Mais maintenant, nous voici avec les conservateurs. Ils veulent augmenter, de 1 600 $, la contribution à une campagne électorale et la doubler, en plus, à 3 300 $. Trois mille trois cents. Je ne sais pas pour vous, madame la Présidente, mais moi, je n’ai pas, on va dire, « accès » à un tel montant d’argent. Mais je vais vous dire, ce ne sont pas les gens qui demeurent dans les miennes, mes communautés, qui ont accès à un tel montant d’argent. Et puis je vais aussi vous dire que ce ne sont pas les gens qui prennent soin des gens dans les maisons de longue durée qui ont accès à cet argent-là.

Les gens qui ont accès à cet argent-là, ce sont de grands amis du gouvernement : des développeurs, des gens qui ont la capacité de faire de telles donations de tels montants, pas seulement de leur position, mais de tous les gens dans leur famille, pour aider le gouvernement conservateur à bâtir leur avenir. Ce sont les gens qui vont avoir accès à nous donner ce montant ici.

En plus, dans cette demande, un candidat peut augmenter sa propre contribution de 5 000 $ à 10 000 $. Bien, je m’excuse, ce ne sont pas tous les gens qui ont la chance de le faire, ça—

The Acting Speaker (Mrs. Lisa Gretzky): My apologies for interrupting the member. The time for debate is over. You will be able to finish your time the next time this bill is called.

Second reading debate deemed adjourned.

Members’ Statements

International Women’s Day

Ms. Jill Andrew: Today, on International Women’s Day, I recognize our St. Paul’s women: You have disproportionately shouldered the brunt of this pandemic. It is why I am committed to a feminist recovery.

Our front-line health care workers: You have continuously shown tenacity and courage throughout this ordeal. Essential caregivers, again primarily women: I’ve spoken with you. I know the weight of your care work. Our seniors in our rental apartments: Many of you live alone. I thank you for our phone calls where you often remind me to dress warmly and keep fighting for you. I will.

I stand with women with disabilities in St. Paul’s. Many of you are injured workers holding it down for your families, doing your absolute best. I stand with our single moms desperate for child care; with women and children experiencing homelessness, who simply want the dignity of a stable place to sleep. I stand with women without children—you are no less important.

I give gratitude to our teachers and education workers for your tireless work. Our women business owners, essential workers, local farmers, artists and creatives: I am so deeply grateful for you. You bring St. Paul’s to life. You give us colour, our feeling and our vibe.

To all of you, I will continue to fight for your right to housing, pay equity, paid sick days, your safety at work, your physical and mental health. On International Women’s Day and beyond, I stand boldly in this House because of you and for you, and I am deeply thankful. Happy International Women’s Day.

International Women’s Day

Mr. Stan Cho: I rise today in honour of International Women’s Day. Although women in Ontario have made great strides for equality in the boardrooms, political arenas and hockey rinks, they continue to earn less, face harassment, discrimination and, in the worst cases, violence.

Almost three years ago, a man drove a rented van down the sidewalks of Yonge Street in Willowdale, killing 10 people and injuring 16. This heinous, cowardly act of violence was a deliberate attack aimed at women in my community. One of the eight women killed that day was 31-year-old Anne Marie D’Amico. In the wake of the tragedy, Anne Marie’s family created the Anne Marie D’Amico Foundation as a way to find light in the darkest of times and to honour her memory.

The Anne Marie D’Amico Foundation works tirelessly to create new spaces for abused women and children at the North York Women’s Shelter. Of the 10 new spaces they created this past year, all were quickly taken by victims of domestic abuse—abuse that in many cases was made worse by the pandemic, where vulnerable women already living in unstable conditions were being trapped in a house with their abuser.

As we celebrate International Women’s Day and the contributions made by women in our lives and communities, let us also acknowledge and thank organizations like the Anne Marie D’Amico Foundation for the work they have done for victims of domestic abuse, and let us all join the fight to end violence against women everywhere.

Walter Gretzky

Mrs. Lisa Gretzky: How do you summarize the life of someone like Walter Gretzky in the short time that I have? My first thought is, you can’t. But as my father-in-law pointed out, Walter’s motto was, “There’s no such thing as ‘can’t.’” And so, I will give it my best shot.

Wally had a deep love of the game of hockey—a love he passed on to not only his children, but other kids too. He encouraged and nurtured the love of the game by instilling in others an ethic of hard work, determination and confidence in oneself.

Much like for hockey, Wally had a deep love for his community and his country. He was generous with his time, whether through raising money for the numerous charitable organizations he was involved in, serving meals to those in need at a local church, chatting with or singing to anyone nearby, both adults and children alike.

Wally opened up his home to anyone that knocked on the door, leading them into the basement to enjoy his sports memorabilia collection. He was honoured with the Brantford Citizen of the Year award, is an inductee to the Brantford Walk of Fame, a member of the Order of Ontario and a member of the Order of Canada. Wally carried the Olympic torch and received honorary degrees from three universities.

While he achieved much in his lifetime, one might say his most notable accomplishment was what he gave to others: kindness and the way he made others feel. Whether family or someone he had never met before, Wally always wanted you to feel listened to, included and appreciated, like you were the Great One.

On Saturday, Wally was laid to rest, with a crowd of people in hockey jerseys and his kids tapping their hockey sticks lining the street outside the church to show their respect.

In my house, he was Uncle Walter; in Brantford, he was Lord Mayor; to many, he was Wally; to our country, he was Canada’s hockey dad. His legacy will live on in every arena, backyard rink and memory of those who had the pleasure of meeting him. Every time we hear a stick tap on the boards it will be Walter Gretzky telling us, “There is no such thing as ‘can’t.’” Rest well, Wally.

COVID-19 response

Mr. Lorne Coe: The government is working to support the health and well-being of Whitby seniors during COVID-19. The recently announced funding provided to Whitby Seniors Active Living Centres in downtown Whitby and Brooklin will help local seniors stay safe and socially connected through virtual and remote programs. This year’s investment focuses on interactive telephone-based group programming and online educational programs such as tax clinics, technology assistance, health and wellness and COVID information.

Given the social isolation that COVID-19 has brought to many seniors, it’s important that we look to programs that will keep them safe and connected. The government’s significant investment in Seniors Active Living Centres will help Whitby’s older adults stay virtually engaged with their friends, families and communities while combatting social isolation during the pandemic.

Whitby Seniors Active Living Centres programming will provide support for older adults and their well-being by keeping them active and socially connected within their own communities. What is clear is that the government remains absolutely committed to the safety, independence and well-being of Whitby seniors.

International Women’s Day

Ms. Jennifer K. French: Today is International Women’s Day. I’m going to say, first, that women across this province deserve respect and appreciation for their work, care and sacrifice throughout this pandemic. We have seen women on the front lines across fields and jurisdictions, but we know many of the vulnerable and essential-worker jobs are predominantly female and many of those women are racialized and further marginalized.

Consider the never-ending work of caregivers and personal support workers: PSWs who have been on the front lines in long-term and seniors care or working with vulnerable neighbours in their homes, who can’t get fair wages or adequate training and who work relentlessly without fair or safe staffing levels. We call our health care workers “heroes,” but many of them are women and they have had to fight for PPE and respect from the beginning.

Education workers are predominantly female and we’ve seen how diminished, disrespected and exploited they have been by this government during this pandemic. Why? Because they cost money to employ. Also, they work in a field with children. We’ve seen how poorly regarded they have been over this past year.

Women work in every field, and we need to ensure there are clear paths to employment, training and fair compensation for them. We’ve heard that we are in a she-cession. There will not be the economic recovery we all need without a feminist recovery. This government has to reverse the cuts to shelters, rape crisis centres and women’s services and programs. Skills training, accessible employment supports, pay equity, child care and paid sick days all must be a part of this government’s plan if they really want to raise the status of women in this province—and that is hoping that they do.

On this International Women’s Day, we must commit to ensuring a brighter and safer path ahead for all women.

Sexual violence and harassment

Mr. Stephen Blais: Happy International Women’s Day.

Recently, the cities of Ottawa, Brampton and Barrie have all concluded investigations into serious cases of workplace violence and sexual harassment by members of council. In these cases, the most severe penalty that can be imposed is the suspension of pay for 90 days. Municipal councillors can have their seats vacated for poor attendance or for spending too much on their election night parties, but not for sexually harassing or inappropriately touching their employees or co-workers.

In Ottawa, the integrity commissioner found that a councillor committed “incomprehensible incidents of harassment” against staff over many years. In Brampton, the integrity commissioner found that a councillor engaged in “unnecessary, unwelcome, and unwanted sexual touching.”

Despite these findings, these councillors remain in office. Brampton’s integrity commissioner said she was displeased there was no avenue that allowed for the councillors’ immediate removal from office. In Ottawa, city councillors passed a resolution requesting the government make these changes to allow for this. The minister’s response was to reject the idea outright.

I’ve been working with stakeholders for some time and will soon be bringing forward a private member’s bill that would allow a municipal council seat to be vacated in cases of workplace violence and harassment. I call on all members of the Legislature to support this proposal and pass the changes swiftly to bring greater accountability to Ontario’s local leaders.

International Women’s Day

Ms. Goldie Ghamari: Today is International Women’s Day. I want to wish all the amazing women and girls here in the Legislature, in my riding of Carleton and across the province, including my amazing staff as well as my mother, grandmother and sister, a happy International Women’s Day.

I’d like to take a moment to highlight the accomplishments of some of the amazing women of Carleton this past year, including:

—Heather Larmer, who was recognized as one of five Canadian professionals under 40 by Canadian Defence Review magazine;

—Estella Aversa, who made a great video in honour of front-line workers;

—Liz Ellwood, who recently opened up her business, Maverick’s Donut Company, in Stittsville;

—Katie Xu, who was the 2020 Special Olympics Ontario athlete of the year;

—Amanda Knox, who was a 2020 Ottawa Book Awards finalist;

—Brenda Miller, who won the Melvin Jones Fellowship Award;

—Charlene Burnside, who spent hours making fabric masks for her community of Richmond;

—Keira Dixon, who performed “It’s Corona Time” on YouTube for episode 2 of Kids Around the World;

—Danielle Barabé-Bussières, who was the 2020 Canada’s photographer of the year in the Craftsman of Photographic Arts designation;

—the South Carleton girls’ curling team, who were the National Capital Secondary School Athletic Association champions in 2020.

Mr. Speaker, the list goes on and on, but unfortunately, I’m running out of time. It’s truly an honour to represent such amazing women and girls in Carleton. The future of Carleton, Ottawa and Ontario is certainly bright.

Happy International Women’s Day.

COVID-19 immunization

Ms. Doly Begum: Mr. Speaker, over the past month, I have raised the need for a faster, move comprehensive vaccine rollout for Ontario and called on the Premier to commit to an equitable distribution of vaccines.

Today, I want to tell this House about a constituent of Scarborough Southwest in hopes that my call will finally be answered. Thomas Cooper bravely served with bomber command in the Royal Canadian Air Force as a member of the 408 “Goose” squadron. Bomber command faced a death rate of 46%. Mr. Cooper designed bearings for aircraft engines for SKF Canada and was involved in the Avro Arrow project.

His daughter Cathryn contacted us. She’s worried for her father and has no central place to get information as to when her father can get vaccinated. While other parts of the province get vaccines, Mr. Cooper’s family is left in the dark, feeling hopeless.

Cathryn asks: Why is Scarborough being so neglected? It has been a hotbed for COVID-19 infection. Surely if the desire is to reduce the spread of COVID-19 in this province, the people of Scarborough should be a high priority.

Mr. Speaker, individuals outside of Scarborough can get vaccinated. The former Premier can get vaccinated. That’s great; they should be getting vaccinated. But so should Mr. Cooper and the many others who have been waiting patiently for months in Scarborough. As someone who served his country and answered the call at the age of 19, Mr. Cooper deserves better. Scarborough Southwest deserves better.

Human trafficking

Mr. Mike Harris: Last week, I had the chance to virtually welcome the Solicitor General to Waterloo region for a round table with some of the organizations who combat human trafficking and support victims in my community.

While we may not see it, human trafficking is happening all across the province, in our small towns and our urban centres. It’s a horrible reality, but my community is no exception, Mr. Speaker.

I want to thank all the attendees for sharing their feedback on our government’s new bill, the Combating Human Trafficking Act, which is the first of its kind in Canada. It’s a real honour to be part of a government that has made putting an end to this heinous crime and the protection of victims a priority. It was just last year that our comprehensive $307-million anti-human trafficking strategy was launched, and we are now making changes to give law enforcement additional tools to prevent and deter human trafficking.

As I heard during our discussions, these new measures will build on the ongoing collaboration in my region, providing clarity and, importantly, raising awareness about the risks of human trafficking.

As members of this House, we all have the responsibility to shed light on the fact that this is happening in our communities, to raise awareness about the prevention of this crime and to help the survivors and the people who support them. I look forward to continuing this ongoing conversation with the experts in my community.

International Women’s Day

Ms. Jane McKenna: As we celebrate International Women’s Day, I would like to recognize some of the incredible women in Burlington:

—local leaders like Colleen Mulholland, from the Burlington Community Foundation; Anita Cassidy, from economic development; Andrea Dodd, from our restaurant association; Carla Nel, from the Burlington Chamber of Commerce; and Judy Worsley, from the Aldershot BIA;

—in our long-term-care and seniors’ homes, there’s Sharon Bailey, from Burloak long-term care; Sheri Levy-Abraham, from Bethany Residence; and Maria Clarke, from Wellington Park;

—women who connect people with jobs, like Lisa Rizzato, from the Centre for Skills Development; Kelly Hoey and Michelle Murray, from HIEC; and Kelly Duffin, from Goodwill, The Amity Group;

—women supporting our kids, including Alison Brindle, from the Learning Disabilities Association of Halton-Hamilton; Cindy I’Anson, from Woodview Mental Health and Autism Service; Andréa Grebenc, from Halton’s public school board; Lita Barrie, from Burlington’s libraries; and Janice Robinson and Lynn Barker, from Halton children’s aid; and

—women like Lisa Kohler, from the Halton Environmental Network; Lisa Lunski, from the Wellington Square Meal Bag Program; Amy Schnurr, from BurlingtonGreen; and Bridget Saulnier, from NUVO Network.

I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention my four children, Jennifer, Courtney, Meghan and Taylor. They bless me and inspire me not only today but every day. You amaze me with your intelligence, compassion, humour, drive and capacity for unconditional love.

Walter Gretzky

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): That concludes our members’ statements for this morning. It is now time for oral questions.

Mrs. Lisa Gretzky: Point of order.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m sorry; I apologize. There is a point of order by the member for Windsor West.

Mrs. Lisa Gretzky: I seek unanimous consent for the House to observe a moment of silence to pay tribute to the contributions and memory of Walter Gretzky.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Windsor West is seeking the unanimous consent of the House to observe a moment of silence to pay tribute to the memory of Walter Gretzky. Agreed? Agreed.

I’ll ask members to rise.

The House observed a moment’s silence.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Thank you very much. Members may take their seats.

I understand the member for Scarborough Southwest has a point of order.

Ms. Doly Begum: I seek unanimous consent to bring forward a motion requiring the government to implement paid sick days legislation to help protect workers in Scarborough and across Ontario from COVID-19, so no one has to make the difficult choice between staying home when sick and being able to pay the bills.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Scarborough Southwest is seeking the unanimous consent of the House to require the government to bring forward a motion. Agreed? I heard a no.

Question Period

COVID-19 immunization

Ms. Andrea Horwath: First of all, I want to wish everybody a happy International Women’s Day, not only my colleagues here in the House but also women and girls around the province.

My first question is to the Premier. I think, like all Ontarians, on Friday I was really excited to hear that we’re finally going to get vaccines rolling into our province. I think that’s something absolutely to celebrate, and, of course, also to celebrate those front-line health care workers, pharmacists and family docs who are going to be helping with getting those vaccines into people’s arms.

I was also pleased that the government finally agreed to put front-line workers in hot spots, our COVID heroes, into the second-phase plan for the implementation of the vaccine for people in those workplaces and those neighbourhoods.

Speaker, my question for the Premier is, does he believe that it’s the right thing to do to have people lose pay when they have to go and get their vaccine?

Hon. Doug Ford: First of all, Mr. Speaker, I would like to wish all the women in Ontario a happy International Women’s Day. We have some of the greatest women in the world right here in Ontario.

Mr. Speaker, I don’t believe that the front-line health care workers should have to get their pay deducted. That’s my personal opinion. If they are within the hospital, within the health care system, and everyone else is lined up, they should be able to get a vaccination. That’s the answer to the question.

The good news is, we’re heading up towards a million vaccinations. We have a well-oiled machine. We have the infrastructure set up right across the province. Again, Mr. Speaker, all we’re waiting for are the vaccines. As soon as we get those, they’re going to be into people’s arms. We continue to lead the country in vaccinations.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: The Premier will know that the Employment Standards Act doesn’t cover people taking time off work without losing pay to get a vaccine. We know that the federal program does not cover off the potential loss of pay for workers to leave work to get their vaccine.

I think it’s really important that we don’t put up barriers—or, in fact, that we actually take down barriers—that prevent people from getting the vaccine, especially, as we know, AstraZeneca has a very short shelf life. And so I would ask the Premier, will he agree to making sure people can take time off work to get their vaccine and not lose any pay?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Minister of Labour, Training and Skills Development.

Hon. Monte McNaughton: As the member opposite knows, we continue to advocate with the federal government for improvements to the sick pay program that they have. But I am pleased to announce today in the House that 245,000 workers in Ontario have now applied for or are receiving sick pay benefits across Ontario, and we continue to advocate to improve the program for all workers.

But I would strongly recommend to people right across this province to continue what you’ve been doing every single day since COVID-19 hit the province, and that’s continue working together to get through this. It’s great news that almost a million more vaccinations are coming to the province this week. We’re going to continue to get needles in the arms of people to finally eradicate COVID-19 from the province of Ontario.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Speaker, this is something that experts actually agree with as well, that people shouldn’t have to worry about losing pay to get vaccinated.

In fact, Dr. Michael Warner, director of critical care at Michael Garron Hospital, says this: “Essential workers aged 60-64 toiling in factories and fulfillment centres will not be able to take time off to head to their local/distant pharmacy to get the” AstraZeneca “vaccine” unless the government provides “paid vax time.”

The question is, why would the Premier object to something that would make it easy for our front-line heroes in those factories and in those neighbourhoods to get vaccinated?

Hon. Monte McNaughton: We’re not objecting to that. In fact, we continue to work with our federal partners. Obviously, these are clearly unprecedented times with COVID-19 here in the province, across Canada and across the world, but I’m proud to say we’ve made huge improvements when it comes to protecting the health and safety of workers, their families and the communities at large.

In fact, there is now one month of paid sick days for workers here in Ontario and across the country. Some 245,000 workers are either receiving sick pay or have applied for sick pay. There is $700 million left in that bank account. We’re going to continue to work with our federal government and work with all of our partners across the country to ensure that the health and safety of all workers is protected.

I believe that the overwhelming majority of people are excited to get their vaccinations and will show up to get vaccinations.

COVID-19 immunization

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My next question is also for the Premier. Folks will know that the NDP actually has a bill that we’ve been trying to get the government to agree to. It was brought forward by the member from London West. We’ve debated it at least half a dozen times, if not more, here. We’ll be doing it again today. In fact, that bill does contain a clause that allows workers to take time off to get vaccinated. But every time we raise it, the Premier shoots it down. So my question is, what’s his plan to make sure that workers, front-line heroes, can actually go and get their vaccinations without losing pay?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Minister of Labour, Training and Skills Development.

Hon. Monte McNaughton: I’m proud of what this government has done to protect the health and safety of every single person in this province. In fact, the very first initiative that this government brought forward, supported by all members of this House, was job-protected leave, which told every worker in this province that if they’re in self-isolation, if they’re in quarantine, if you’re a mom or a dad staying home to look after a son or a daughter because of the disruption in the school system, you can’t be fired. Furthermore, we took action to eliminate the need for sick notes.

I’m proud of what this Premier and what this government have done on behalf of workers. Premier Ford led the charge in Canada to deliver $1.1 billion worth of sick pay for workers. As I said a moment ago, more than 245,000 workers are now receiving that benefit. The opposition parties called for two paid sick days. The official opposition said seven, maybe 10. I’m proud to say that we’ve delivered one month of paid sick days for workers in this province.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: The government’s rollout of the vaccine has been very slow. It’s been very confusing. We know that we’ve now slipped to eighth when it comes to per capita vaccinations being achieved in the 10 provinces. The variants, we know, are picking up speed in terms of transmission. We know that AstraZeneca has a shelf life that we have to be concerned about. And we know that what we should be doing is everything we possibly can to encourage people to get their vaccines and to take away the barriers to doing so.

Why will this Premier not step up and make sure workers, our front-line heroes, can get their vaccine without losing any pay?

Hon. Monte McNaughton: We have been stepping up for workers every single day during this pandemic. In fact, I’m proud to say that 80% of the federal sick day program is directly deposited into workers’ bank accounts within three to five days. Workers in Ontario can now apply more than once.

We continued to advocate on behalf of workers. A few weeks ago, the federal government, to their credit, stepped up and delivered 20 days, one month, of paid sick days for workers. We’re going to continue every single day to stand up for the working-class families of this province. We’re going to stand with workers every day until COVID-19 is a distant memory.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Well, we on this side of the House are ready to pass any kind of legislation or motion the government will bring forward to make sure people are able to continue to get paid even if they have to go get a vaccine. That’s something we’re prepared—it’s been a year, Speaker. It’s been a year and this government has not stepped up to protect the livelihoods of our front-line heroes throughout this pandemic.

It’s about time that we do the right thing here. I mean, how hard is it to do the right thing by these front-line workers? I would ask the Premier and the government to make it easy for folks, to take the burden off, to make sure people don’t have to worry about losing pay when they make their appointment to go get vaccinated. Will the Premier please do the right thing?

Hon. Monte McNaughton: We’ve been advocating on behalf of workers and their families in every community every single day during this pandemic. In fact, our government has invested more than $45 billion, including billions in additional supports for the health care system, supports for individuals, supports for businesses.

Mr. Speaker, the Premier of this province worked with the Prime Minister and all provincial and territorial leaders to deliver over a billion dollars in paid sick days for workers. There is still over $700 million left in that bank account. We’re going to continue to work with Minister Qualtrough and the federal government to continue advocating on behalf of workers to ensure that all of us, working together, get through COVID-19.

Land use planning

Last Thursday, the government tabled the Supporting Broadband and Infrastructure Expansion Act. Normally, you would assume a bill with a name like that focused on expanding broadband. However, on Friday, leaked memos revealed that the true purpose of the legislation was to help casino developers in Durham pave over protected wetlands and avoid a court battle.

That’s bad enough, Mr. Speaker, but a scan of Elections Ontario’s records shows that just days ago the PC Party cashed in nearly $5,000 worth of donations from the project’s lead developers. Can the Premier tell Ontarians why his party is seeking big donations from developers and then helping them pave over protected wetlands in the province of Ontario?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The parliamentary assistant, the member for Milton.

Mr. Parm Gill: I want to thank the member opposite for the question. Every single MZO issued by the minister on non-provincially owned land has been at the request of the local municipalities. Of course, as we all know, in this particular incident, it was requested by the city of Pickering. It was supported by the region of Durham. This is an important project for the region.

Mr. Speaker, to answer the question in terms of the political donations, I reject the premise of that question altogether. If the member opposite did a little bit more homework on that, she would find out that the same developers actually donated thousands of dollars to the members of the opposite party, including the former Premier’s riding and the current leader of the Liberal Party.

Interjections.

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

Ms. Catherine Fife: Well, perhaps you should reject the donations, and then you would have some credibility in this House.

Ontarians aren’t surprised by the Premier’s relationship with big developers and especially that it’s resulting in a loss of wetlands and natural spaces. But it’s wild how brazen he’s become while he thinks Ontarians are preoccupied with the pandemic.

On February 24, the developers filled the PC Party’s coffers with nearly $5,000. Next year, they’re going to be able to donate $10,000. But just eight days later, on March 4, the minister rushed out a regulation that effectively forces the warehouse to be built on top of a wetland while also putting related legislation into a bill that’s supposed to be about broadband Internet, which is an issue that we all care about.

Speaker, does the Premier really think that Ontarians are that gullible, that there’s no connection between the donations and what you’re designing through legislation for developers, especially when this government bends over backwards to accommodate his big donors?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m going to have to ask the member to withdraw for imputing motive.

Ms. Catherine Fife: Withdraw.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The government can reply: the member for Milton.

Mr. Parm Gill: Mr. Speaker, the facts are important, and we all know the NDP and the Liberals always seem to be short when it comes to the real facts. As I pointed out, this particular MZO was requested by the city of Pickering. It was supported by the region of Durham. This is an important project for the region. This project would help create over 10,000 jobs and boost the economy in the region.

The proponent and the TRCA have also entered into an agreement that will ensure the creation of ecological benefit that meets or exceeds any loss to the natural system. Mr. Speaker, this will lead to a net benefit to the natural environment.

International Women’s Day

Mr. Mike Harris: I have had many extraordinary women in my life who have helped shape me into the man I am today, from my mother to my grandmothers to aunts, teachers and even neighbours, women who have played a strong role in my upbringing. And I know that I am not the only one in this House who can say such a thing, Mr. Speaker. Now, I have my wife and my daughter to help shape me into being a more loving husband and supportive dad. Each one of us owes a lot to the women in our lives who have been there in the good and the bad times.

We know that COVID has impacted women at a higher rate than men. This includes both economically and their social well-being. Speaker, can the Associate Minister of Children and Women’s Issues tell the House what the government is doing to support women across Ontario, especially during the pandemic?

Hon. Jill Dunlop: Thank you to the member from Kitchener–Conestoga for that great question and also for being a friend and supporter to myself and my caucus colleagues.

It is true that the pandemic has disproportionately impacted women. Women have been more likely to lose their jobs or leave work to care for kids, and the rates of domestic violence are on the rise.

From the very beginning of the pandemic, I have been working hard with sector partners and colleagues to put supports around women. Women’s shelters have remained open. Additional funding has been given to help with infection and prevention control. Emergency child care has been given to front-line workers, a majority of those being women.

Our government has given wage increases to front-line workers like PSWs and those in the social services sector with, again, the majority of them being women, and we are investing into retraining those who have lost their jobs into things like skilled trades, which have many incredible opportunities that are well-paying and secure. These are just some of the things that we have done, with more to do so that women will not be left behind during this pandemic and beyond.

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

Mr. Mike Harris: Thank you to the minister for that response. It’s reassuring to know that our government is focusing on protecting those who have been impacted the most by the pandemic, and of course this includes women.

Speaker, the minister mentioned something that I think is important: Many of those on the front lines of this pandemic are women. These are strong, brave women who have been on the front lines, front and centre, risking their lives to support us. From nurses and doctors, to support staff at our local hospitals, to police officers and first responders: a heartfelt thank you. As I said before, we really owe a lot to the women in our lives, whether directly or indirectly. We should be celebrating them and thanking them every day, Speaker. It is even more true on International Women’s Day.

Can the minister please share what we can do to thank all the women in our lives for the incredible work that they do?

Hon. Jill Dunlop: Thank you again to the member for that question.

We celebrate International Women’s Day to highlight the success and leadership of women around the world, and the first place I would like to start is right here with the women in this chamber. Each one is a wonderful representative in their ridings and their community, showing strong leadership that women belong everywhere. While we may disagree on policy or politics, each one of us is working hard to represent our constituents while balancing many other responsibilities. It is an honour to serve in this House with each and every one of you.

I also want to take a moment to recognize the nurses, doctors, personal support workers, researchers, child care and early-years workers and other women on the front line of this pandemic, and to say a thank you to all of them. We already know how phenomenal women and girls are and the important role that they play in each one of our lives. COVID has only made it clearer that Ontario would not operate without the extraordinary women who have stepped in and stepped up to protect our province. That includes our Deputy Premier and Minister of Health, who has done an outstanding job to work hard for this province.

Land use planning

Ms. Jennifer K. French: My question is to the Premier. Lower Duffins Creek in the Durham region is an environmental wetland complex that has been classified as provincially significant and is protected by law, yet this Premier and his minions—sorry, ministers—are pursuing its destruction at all costs. The community cannot understand why this government would prioritize a warehouse that could be built elsewhere over a provincially significant, irreplaceable, environmentally vital wetland.

Ontario Nature and Environmental Defence have launched an ecojustice lawsuit against this government alleging unlawful use of a minister’s zoning order, or MZO, allowing for demolition of a part of this protected wetland.

Speaker, this government just introduced Bill 257 that would retroactively make lawful what up until this bill would have been deemed unlawful. My question is: Is the Premier planning to rewrite any other laws to wriggle out of any other lawsuits?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Parliamentary assistant and member for Milton.

Mr. Parm Gill: As I pointed out earlier, every single MZO issued by the minister has been at the request of the local municipality, unless the lands are provincially owned. In this particular case, the request was made by the city. It was supported by the region. This project is important to the region. It would create over 10,000 jobs.

Mr. Speaker, we have a responsibility to support our municipal partners. That is exactly what we’re doing. The proponent in this case and the TRCA have entered into an agreement that will ensure the creation of ecological benefit that meets or exceeds any loss to the natural system and will lead to a net benefit to the natural environment system. We’re also committed to growing the greenbelt. We’ve launched the consultation, currently. We’ve made a commitment, unlike the Liberals, who carved out the greenbelt 17 different times.

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

Ms. Jennifer K. French: Again to the Premier: As CBC recently reported, an internal government memo warns that without these Bill 257 Planning Act amendments, there is a “moderately high risk that” this “MZO would be found to have contravened” that law. It also warns that without consultation with impacted Indigenous communities, there is a “high risk that a court would conclude that Ontario has not fulfilled its constitutional consultation obligations.” Wow. This government is going to remarkable lengths to follow through on this warehouse promise.

This weekend, hundreds of people in Pickering took a stand for the wetland and against this Premier’s anti-environment agenda. The President of the Treasury Board, who is also the Minister of Finance, should be defending this environmental treasure in his community. Folks across the Durham region want to know why this MPP, the Premier and the Minister of Municipal Affairs are doggedly clinging to this particular project.

I would love to know who’s really making the decisions for the Premier or for the province. My question is this: What will it take for this Premier to leave Duffins Creek alone and stop attacking the environment?

Mr. Parm Gill: As I continue to point out, facts are facts. Facts can’t be changed. I know the members opposite are always, for some reason, short on facts.

As I mentioned, we made a commitment to protect the greenbelt. The minister has been absolutely clear that we will not allow any development into the greenbelt, period. As a matter of fact, we are working on expanding the greenbelt. We’ve launched the consultations.

Unlike the opposition NDP that supported the Liberals—the Liberal government carved out the greenbelt 17 different times. We believe it is absolutely unacceptable to be able to do that, especially to support their friends, to support the insiders. We will not tolerate that on this side of the House. We will continue to stand up for every single Ontarian.

COVID-19 response

Mr. Roman Baber: My question is to the Associate Minister of Children and Women’s Issues. Minister, today we mark and celebrate International Women’s Day. Like all of our colleagues, I’m astonished and saddened by the spike in domestic partner violence over the last year. I’m referring to a February 15

article by the Canadian Press regarding the continued rise in domestic violence. Canada’s Assaulted Women’s Helpline fielded 20,000 calls between October 1 and December 31, 2020, compared to 12,000 during the same period in 2019.

“Everything closed overnight, and our crisis lines lit up,” said Yvonne Harding, a manager at the organization. There were limited supports for women beforehand, but at least they had outlets. They had opportunities to leave the house to get help, such as daily trips to and from school. Less access to family and friends is leaving victims with fewer options.

Minister, instead of citing dollar figures and statistics as to what the government claims to have done to stop the rise in domestic violence, I’d like to ask if you’d agree with me that ending the lockdown would immediately help many women to be safer at home.

Hon. Jill Dunlop: Thank you to the member for that question. I think it was about a year ago that I visited a shelter in your region with the D’Amico family, and thank you for the contributions that they have made. I’d also like to thank the front-line workers working in women’s shelters across Ontario. Thank you to OAITH and Marlene and her workers. They have worked so hard to ensure women are kept safe at this time, because it’s not always safe for everyone to stay home, and women and children who are at risk of violence need to have supports in place.

It’s a critical time for residential service providers for people experiencing violence to have the security that they need to continue supporting vulnerable women. This year, our government is investing $172 million in supports for survivors and violence prevention initiatives. This includes investments in emergency shelters, counselling, 24-hour crisis lines, safety planning and transitional housing. And as part of the COVID-19 Action Plan for Vulnerable People, we are also investing $40 million in COVID residential relief funding.

I will have more to answer in the supplementary.

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

Mr. Roman Baber: Thank you, Speaker, but my question was if the minister agreed that ending the lockdown would help many women be safer at home. I submit that the answer is unequivocally yes, and therefore continue to implore the government to end the lockdown.

Minister, the effects of the lockdown on the economic well-being of women are profound and disproportionate compared to men. Last November, the Royal Bank said that tens of thousands of women have already left the workforce. According to the Canadian Women’s Foundation, women accounted for more than 63% of jobs lost since March 2020.

The job recovery among men was much better than among women. As of the end of July, women recouped only half of the initial job losses and mostly in part-time work. So I ask the minister to please set aside what the Doug Ford government claims to have done.

On this International Women’s Day, would the minister agree that ending the lockdown and fully reopening the economy is the best thing to do for the well-being of Ontario’s women?

Hon. Jill Dunlop: Thank you to the member for that question. I agree that women need to be kept safe and have supports in place. I also agree that women have been disproportionately affected during this pandemic. That’s why this government is investing $4.6 million in the Women’s Economic Security Program and $2.2 million in Investing in Women’s Futures program. These are programs that are made available to provide crucial funding to organizations that support women who are in low-income positions to develop knowledge, skills and experience to transition into well-paying jobs.

I thank the Minister of Labour, Training and Skills Development for the work he has been doing to encourage women in the skilled trades by providing the funds available and necessary to take women who have lost their jobs and give them the opportunities to retrain for jobs of the future; jobs that are sitting empty, where we need women to fill those places.

I thank all of my colleagues, and thank you to all the women we have worked with at virtual round tables, hearing first-hand what the needs and concerns of the women in Ontario are. As we said, keeping women safe and supported is our number one priority.

Broadband infrastructure

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Next question? The member for Kitchener–Conestoga.

Mr. Mike Harris: Thank you again, Speaker. This time it’s to the Minister of Infrastructure.

Even before the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, I received inquiries from many of my constituents in Kitchener–Conestoga who are struggling with unreliable broadband service. The pandemic has only amplified the problems of poor, inadequate service. Far too many people in our province lack reliable Internet and, in some cases, they have no connectivity at all.

I know our government has made historic investments to improve connectivity, and we understand the importance of this for our small businesses and the many families and students who rely on it to learn and stay connected. Yet despite all the provincial investments and the potential benefits of your legislation to remove barriers to building broadband faster, there are still some members of this House who claim the province has to do more, that we aren’t doing enough and that there’s more work to do.

Would you please explain to us exactly what it will take to get adequate broadband across Ontario?

Hon. Laurie Scott: Thank you to the member from Kitchener–Conestoga for his question and his advocacy for his constituents. The member is quite right: Our government has done a number of things to help close the digital divide. As the member points out, in the provincial budget presented last fall, we announced historic investments to broadband infrastructure.

But as I’ve pointed out many times before to the members of the Legislative Assembly here, broadband is a federally regulated sector. It is the CRTC that is responsible for establishing countrywide rates and standards for Internet and cellular connectivity.

However, despite this, Ontario is not standing still. Our government is taking steps to close the digital divide, and while we continue to call on our federal government to do its part and properly fund broadband, I would invite all members of this House to join us in that call.

Mr. Speaker, we are making historic investments and taking steps to improve and expand broadband connectivity to communities right across the province, and I’ll have more to say in the supplementary.

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

Mr. Mike Harris: Minister, I’d like to read an email I received from Keith, a Conestoga College student from Elmira, taking online courses:

“Dear MPP Harris, when I finished high school, I never imagined that I would be taking college courses online because of COVID-19.

“If I had reliable Internet taking my courses would be far less stressful. I often have problems participating in my classes because of weak and unreliable connections, and sometimes I have to do my school work late at night or early in the morning to get a better connection.”

Keith goes on: “With my mid-terms about to start, I’m really concerned that my lousy Internet will add unnecessary stress.

“With more and more people doing things online, when can we expect things to improve for people outside the city when it comes to Internet service?” I’d like to thank Keith for that message.

My question, again, for the Minister of Infrastructure is: When might students like Keith have access to reliable high-speed Internet?

Hon. Laurie Scott: I’d again like to thank the member opposite for his question. I want to say to Keith that I understand the difficulties he’s experiencing. I live it, too, as many of the members of the Legislature do.

I understand that more and more people are accessing services online. Students are learning online, families are shopping online, and that’s why we have a plan. That’s why, for more than a year, our government has taken action to improve Internet connectivity for communities in Ontario that lack adequate service. We’re making historic investments to improve Internet service in northern Ontario, southwestern Ontario, eastern Ontario and central Ontario.

Last week, I introduced legislation that, if passed, will help us bridge the digital divide, because now more than ever, we need a made-in-Ontario plan to help build infrastructure faster, strengthen our communities, and lay the foundation for growth and renewal and long-term economic recovery. We’re taking action to remove barriers, and I expect this whole Legislature to support this legislation to increase broadband connectivity—

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

Education funding

Ms. Marit Stiles: This question is for the Premier. Speaker, before the pandemic, students in this province were already struggling with overcrowded classrooms and not enough one-on-one support. What did this government do? They tried to lay off 10,000 teachers. Parents, students, education workers and we in the opposition stopped the worst of those cuts, but we entered this pandemic playing catch-up, racing to hire the staff needed to keep our kids safe and learning.

This pandemic is far from over, but a new Ministry of Education memo is warning that school boards must prepare for staff layoffs for the year ahead. Apparently, the funding for COVID has an expiry date.

Speaker, why is the Premier looking to make deep cuts to education when our kids need more support than ever?

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

Hon. Stephen Lecce: I want to join the Associate Minister of Children and Women’s Issues in congratulating and acknowledging International Women’s Day today.

I will note, Speaker, that there is no government and no Premier—pre-pandemic and during this pandemic—that has invested more in public education than this Progressive Conservative Party. Funding is up per student. Funding to school boards, over $25 billion, is up. Funding in mental health more than doubled; that funding envelope is up. For special education, at historic levels, over $3.1 billion—that funding is up. Funding to prepare students for STEM careers is up in this province. Funding to lift math scores, over $200 million: That funding envelope is up.

To support safe, reliable transportation, funding is up. Funding in the skilled trades and skills development to encourage more into apprenticeships and careers that we know we need: That funding is up. That funding will continue to remain up under this government because believe in public education.

We believe in lifting up, creating an opportunity society, where young people who work hard and get a good education get a good job. That is our mission, and we’re going to continue to focus on lifting students up every single day in this province.

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

Ms. Marit Stiles: Mr. Speaker, perhaps the Minister of Education didn’t hear the question. Making class sizes bigger and laying off staff was always a terrible plan. But today, it is an even worse plan. Frankly, it’s unconscionable.

Children have coped with trauma, loss and anxiety over the last year. Our school communities have shown resilience and creativity in the face of absolutely incredible odds, but this pandemic is not over. The disruption is not over. Every single expert in education is saying the same thing: Students and staff are going to need more support than ever.

Will the Premier assure anxious parents today that he will invest in the well-being, recovery and future of our students and take these cuts off the table?

Hon. Stephen Lecce: Mr. Speaker, our government is going to continue to invest in public education.

I do note the ever-changing position of the member from Davenport. On February 5, the member said, “I’ve been asking where these mystery hires are for months.” And yet today—today—she purports to believe that these hires were critical. So which one is it? Either they didn’t happen for the last six months, as you attacked the government, or they did.

The fact is, Speaker, we know 3,400 more teachers were hired on a temporary basis to support lower classroom sizes, 134 more mental health workers and 1,300 more custodians working hard in our schools. The fact is, we know these temporary investments have made a difference to protect students and keep our schools open, a position contrary to the Liberals and New Democrats, who would have closed schools for a longer period.

We are on the side of parents who want investments going to the front of class. We’re going to continue to deliver that while ensuring quality education, merit-based hiring and a curriculum that leads to more jobs in this province.

Personal support workers

Mr. John Fraser: My question is for the Premier. Speaker, personal support workers are a vital part of care here in Ontario. COVID-19 has revealed just how valuable they are. The majority of PSWs are women. They have been working tirelessly on the front lines, battling this virus, putting themselves at risk and their families at risk, too many times without the proper protective equipment. They care for the people we care for most.

I’ve heard the Premier thank PSWs many times, and I know that they probably appreciate his thanks, but what they need is his commitment.

The temporary wage enhancement is set to expire on March 31.

Speaker, through you: Can the Premier commit to providing PSWs a permanent wage increase?

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

Hon. Christine Elliott: Thank you very much to the member for the question.

We value the work that personal support workers do in all aspects of our health care system—in long-term care, home and community care, hospitals.

As part of the government’s plan to deal with COVID-19, we have increased PSW wages—$3 per hour for eligible workers in long-term care, $3 per hour for eligible workers in home and community care, $2 an hour for eligible workers in public hospitals, and $3 per hour for eligible workers in social services providing direct personal support services to people in their community. This is something that we need to do in order to recruit and retain personal support workers.

We’re examining all aspects of the issues relating to personal support workers, including the amount that they’re being paid. There are many other issues. This is something that is under consideration right now by our government, and we will take action as necessary on or before March 31.

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

Mr. John Fraser: I don’t believe I got the answer that PSWs need to hear today. They need to hear about the government’s commitment. They don’t want to see another six-week gap between the pandemic pay and the next iteration.

It’s critical that we raise these wages to stabilize the workforce, and it’s the right thing to do. One of the challenges that we have right now is that it’s becoming destabilized between home care and long-term care. We know that we need to raise those wages permanently and we have to pay people a decent living wage. Fewer home care PSWs will mean less care for seniors, which means it will put more pressure on long-term care; it will also not allow them to be where they want to be.

Advocates are calling on the government not only to standardize the wages across both sectors but also to raise the wages of PSWs to $25 an hour in all health care settings.

Speaker, through you: Will the Premier assure this House that his government will standardize PSW wages to $25 an hour?

Hon. Christine Elliott: We’re certainly well aware of the issues relating to personal support workers, who provide a vital role in our health care system.

The member will also know that the issue isn’t simply one of remuneration. That is part of it, for sure, but we also know that as we graduate personal support workers in Ontario, almost half of them leave within about a year, because in some cases, they don’t expect the work they’re actually going to be facing. So we need to take a bunch of actions, and one is to make sure that as they’re trained, they have training within some of the places of work—in hospitals, in long-term-care homes, in home and community care—so that they can anticipate what the work is going to be.

We also need to recognize them as a profession. They’re sort of the forgotten workers in the health care system, when in actual fact they are the foundation—especially in home care, where they’re meeting very vulnerable clients.

All of these issues are being taken into consideration right now, along with the issue of remuneration, because we know we need more personal support workers within our health care system.

Pipelines

Mr. Mike Harris: This time, I rise to ask the government about its position on the line 5 energy corridor, following last week’s historic vote. This House voted to call upon the federal and provincial governments to fight against the closure of line 5, while at the same time recognizing the safety of pipelines as a way to transport energy.

Mr. Speaker, will the government House leader please stand and commit that this government will get behind this motion, protect Ontario’s jobs and fight against the closure of line 5?

Hon. Paul Calandra: The member is quite correct: That was a very historic vote last week, for a number of reasons. Not only did the vast majority of this House agree that pipelines are safe and important for jobs and economic activity; we saw an historic shift, finally, from the NDP, who for decades have talked against pipelines, have talked against the safety of pipelines.

Earlier in the week, I know the leader of Her Majesty’s loyal opposition had suggested that the line 5 debate was something that shouldn’t even happen in the province of Ontario. They voted against line 5 twice. But finally, after the great work of the member for Sarnia–Lambton and a number of other members, he was able to convince the NDP that 50 years of NDP ideology on pipeline safety was wrong and that it is responsible for good jobs, it is safe, Mr. Speaker.

We will do all that we can to make sure that we work with the federal government to keep this line 5 going, as the House has asked us to do. I thank the NDP for their support of pipelines and those jobs.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary.

Mr. Mike Harris: I thank the government for its strong position on this issue, and I also want to congratulate the NDP for finally agreeing that pipelines are a safe way to transport energy here in the province. I know that the people of southwestern Ontario would have appreciated it as well if the Liberal members in this House would have also voted to protect jobs and save the line 5 pipeline.

Mr. Speaker, because this is such an important issue, can the government House leader stand and unequivocally affirm that the government here in the province of Ontario will fight for line 5?

Hon. Paul Calandra: Again, the member is absolutely correct, and I can assure the member, and all of those members who voted in favour of line 5, that we will do just that. We will fight to ensure that that motion is brought forward, that our federal friends and our friends down south understand the importance of line 5.

What is shocking, Mr. Speaker, is that in his first test of leadership, the leader of the Liberal Party failed the people of the province of Ontario. He failed workers. He failed all of those people that rely on jobs because of line 5. He has proven that he’s not ready for the job. He’s not up to the job. This Liberal leader is the same as the other Liberal leader, Mr. Speaker.

We will stand up for jobs. We will stand up for pipelines. We will stand up for the billions of dollars of economic activity that natural resources provide to the people of the province of Ontario. Even if the Liberals won’t, Mr. Speaker, we will.

COVID-19 response

Ms. Sara Singh: Today we celebrate International Women’s Day, and I want to wish all our sisters around the world a happy International Women’s Day.

But, Speaker, while we celebrate, we must also commit to ensuring that we have a gender-based strategy to our economic recovery here in the province of Ontario. For the last year, as Ontario faced the biggest crisis it’s ever seen, it’s been women who have been on the forefront of the crisis. Without the sacrifices of these nurses, teachers, PSWs and front-line heroes, all mainly women, who knows where we’d be today.

But while women were working hard to keep us safe and keep our province moving, this government refused to give PSWs the raise that they promised. They sent teachers back to unsafe classrooms. They stood by while women lost their jobs and their livelihoods and were forced to close their businesses. And they keep voting against paid sick days here in Ontario.

My question to the Premier: Will the government commit today, on International Women’s Day, to ensuring that all women will receive the supports that they need in this economic recovery and that they won’t be left behind in this crisis as we move forward?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Associate Minister of Children and Women’s Issues.

Hon. Jill Dunlop: Thank you to the member for that question, and happy International Women’s Day to all women that are here.

In my ministry, we celebrate women every single day. I’d like to take this opportunity to thank the many mentors that I’ve had in my life growing up, such as my mom, who is also a politician locally—and also the work that we need to do to mentor the next generation. I have three young daughters, and I hope that they will work hard to achieve all of their goals.

But I think it’s also important that we’re supported by men. I look to the men in my own caucus who are here to support us, our Premier who supports us as women in government. Thank you to each and every one of you. Everybody has a role in achieving gender equality, and that includes men and boys. We need to continue changing attitudes that prevent women and girls from achieving their full potential.

We recognize that women have been disproportionately affected by this pandemic, and women will not be left behind as this province recovers.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The supplementary? The member for Toronto–St. Paul’s.

Ms. Jill Andrew: Speaker, based on this Conservative government’s responses this morning, on International Women’s Day, women are yet again not a priority. We need an intersectional feminist recovery, one that serves the women of St. Paul’s and across Ontario, during COVID-19 and beyond.

Our local PSWs need a $4-an-hour permanent pay increase, for starters. Our local women small business owners need no evictions. We need funding to keep our businesses alive. We need the funding this government promised us from Metrolinx to market and advertise our small businesses, especially those run by women