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

August 9, 2018

42nd Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcript 2018-Aug-09 (PDF)

L017 - Thu 9 Aug 2018 / Jeu 9 aoû 2018

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Thursday 9 August 2018 Jeudi 9 août 2018

Orders of the Day

Time allocation

Introduction of Visitors

Oral Questions

Curriculum

Curriculum

Municipal elections

Community safety

Social assistance

Refugee and immigration policy

Municipal elections

Ring of Fire

Municipal elections

Opioid abuse

Beverage alcohol sales

Opioid abuse

Firefighting in northern Ontario

Mental health services

Pickering nuclear generating station

Carding

Government’s record

Birthdays

Visitors

Correction of record

Deferred Votes

Time allocation

Introduction of Visitors

Members’ Statements

Autofest Oshawa

Events in York South–Weston

Philip Alexander

Northern transportation

Tree preservation

Introduction of Bills

Zebra Mussel Scan Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur la surveillance des moules zébrées

Zebra Mussel Assessment Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur l’étude du problème des moules zébrées

Ministry of Community and Social Services Amendment Act (Social Assistance Research Commission), 2018 / Loi de 2018 modifiant la

Loi sur le ministère des Services sociaux et communautaires (Commission de recherche sur l’aide sociale)

Zebra Mussel Report Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur le rapport concernant les moules zébrées

Zebra Mussel Examination Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur l’examen des moules zébrées

Waterways Examination Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur l’examen des cours d’eau

Petitions

School facilities

Municipal elections

Municipal elections

Northern transportation

School facilities

Employment standards

Municipal elections

School boards

Pharmacare

Affaires autochtones

Energy policies

Private Members’ Public Business

Carding

Mental health and addiction services

Youth employment

Carding

Mental health and addiction services

Youth employment

Carding

Mental health and addiction services

Orders of the Day

Time allocation

The House met at 0900.

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

Prayers.

Orders of the Day

Time allocation

Hon. Todd Smith: I move that, pursuant to standing order 47 and notwithstanding any other standing order or special order of the House relating to Bill 5,

An Act to amend the City of Toronto Act, 2006, the Municipal Act, 2001 and the Municipal Elections Act, 1996, when Bill 5 is next called as a government order, the Speaker shall put every question necessary to dispose of the second reading stage of the bill, without further debate or amendment, and at such time the bill shall be ordered for third reading, which order may be called that same day; and

That, when the order for third reading of the bill is called, one hour shall be allotted to the third reading stage of the bill, with 30 minutes apportioned to the government, 10 minutes to Her Majesty’s loyal opposition, 10 minutes to the Liberal Party independent members and 10 minutes apportioned to the Green Party independent member. At the end of this time, the Speaker shall interrupt the proceedings and shall put every question necessary to dispose of this stage of the bill without further debate or amendment; and

That, except in the case of a recorded division arising from morning orders of the day, pursuant to standing order 9(c), no deferral of the second reading or third reading vote shall be permitted; and

That, in the case of any division relating to any proceedings on the bill, the division bell shall be limited to five minutes, except that the division bell for the vote on the motion for third reading shall be 15 minutes.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Mr. Smith, Bay of Quinte, has moved government notice of motion number 4. I look to the government side to lead off the debate.

Hon. Todd Smith: No further comments, Speaker.

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

Mr. Peter Tabuns: I appreciate this opportunity to address the motion before us.

Speaker, this motion is profoundly anti-democratic. No one should be surprised: That’s consistent with this government’s approach from the time it was elected. This is not a government of the people; this is a government that has decided to lock out the people.

Some 2.7 million people live in the city of Toronto, and they will not be afforded even a minute—not 30 seconds, not a second—to speak in this building to this bill. Their interests are before us. Their interests are being debated. But they will not be allowed to have even one person, one citizen, come and speak before us. Not one. That is outrageous. That is completely at odds with the language that this government uses—not at odds with its actions. No one should be surprised that this government is eliminating debate. No one should be surprised that this government doesn’t want to hear from the people who are affected. That’s consistent with their approach.

But in this House—built to represent the people of Ontario, meant to act democratically—to completely cut out the people of Toronto from any debate whatsoever is outrageous. The city of Toronto went through a multi-year process of consultations on how they would elect their representatives, their councillors. That process, set in place by former mayor Rob Ford, allowed for consultation across the city. It was a process that was challenged at the Ontario Municipal Board and was upheld at the Ontario Municipal Board. It was a legitimate process of consultation.

This government, this Conservative government, is throwing all that consultation out the window, saying, in effect, that the people of Toronto have no right to speak, because they have been deprived of that right; saying that their opinion on how they should be governed is of no consequence; and opening the way to a truncated debate—and I’m being generous—on the bill itself.

People are well aware that there will be one hour’s debate on a matter of great concern to the people of this city, the city of Toronto, and frankly, a debate that should be of concern to people across Ontario because, if you will remember, when we went through the amalgamation process under Premier Harris, first of all, it was the city of Toronto that got taken apart and reassembled at the whim of the Premier.

But I will note that Mr. Harris actually allowed public input, committee hearings. There was a potential, at least a façade, of democracy. Well, the façade has been cast aside. Why pretend that you’re being democratic when the heart of what you’re doing, in the middle of an election campaign at the city level, is to get rid of all of those democratic trappings and just simply impose your own will?

We had an opportunity in my riding last night for a meeting called on very short notice to discuss this bill and discuss this issue. I don’t know about others, but typically when I’ve called public meetings in August, very few people showed up. Well over 160 and close to 200 people showed up last night. Although people made extended comments about their need to be able to access their elected representative, the core of what they had to say was: “We, the people of Toronto, should be able to decide how many councillors are in the government that we pay for,” because that government isn’t paid for by the province; it’s paid for out of the property taxes of the people of the city of Toronto.

They should be able to decide. They thought that they were deciding when they went through a multi-year consultation process. Now that is being swept away. Not only is it being swept away, but this bill is being rammed through with no consultation of the citizens who are affected.

I say to those in other cities in Ontario, those who watched what happened to Toronto with the amalgamation decision, that it was a few years after that that Premier Harris decided to mess with Ottawa, with Hamilton, and frankly, just say, “In the end, we don’t care what the citizens want. We don’t care how they see it. We’re going to proceed in this fashion.” So they should be very cautious about their own cities—having the province step in and dictate the number of councillors that will be making decisions for them, the number of councillors paid for with their property tax dollars.

Scarborough has about 600,000 people and it has six MPPs. It will, under this bill, have six councillors. Markham, with 300,000 people, would support three MPPs and it has a 12-member council. So if the argument for efficiency is one that is consistent and, in fact, real—and I have doubts about that—then why is it that places like Markham are being told, “You can continue to have 12 councillors instead of three,” but the city of Toronto? “No, that can’t happen. We’re going to ram this through. And you, the citizens of Toronto—2.7 million people—you’re out of luck.

You will not get to say a single word—not a single word—about your fate and future before the legislators, before those who are actually voting on this decision—not a word. You are cut out.” That, Speaker, at its heart, is profoundly anti-democratic.

This is a government that is upending the sex ed curriculum in this province, upending a curriculum meant to prevent child sexual assault and meant to ensure that young LGBTQ youth don’t have a negative perception of themselves, which is dangerous to their mental health and well-being. Rather than argue on the substance of that curriculum—and their substance would be indefensible—rather than argue on that, they’re saying that there wasn’t enough consultation.

So consultation is important to you? What about the people of the city of Toronto, 2.7 million people, who will not be allowed to come before a committee hearing and put out their argument? Because there won’t be a committee hearing. There will not be a single minute of committee hearings. What about the potential for legislators to actually debate the bill clause-by-clause, go through, look for the problems and correct them? No; none of that.

For those of you who’ve been here for a while and those who are new, I’ll note that in committee, often governments correct bills where they see they have made mistakes. That’s the way things are. No legislator is perfect; no legislation writer is perfect. But there will not be that corrective methodology. In fact, what we will get is an approach that gives the minister the power to rewrite the legislation without coming back to this House. That alone is extraordinary.

For those who are not familiar with the process, government sets a framework of laws, and then, within that, ministers get to write more detailed rules called regulations. Typically, if a minister writes a regulation that’s outside the framework of those laws, that regulation is deemed void, invalid and can be challenged in court and thrown out. In this case, we, the legislators, will have our laws thrown out by the minister if he so decides. That is extraordinary. That is completely extraordinary.

So on top of no public consultation, on top of ramming this through, on top of ignoring a multi-year consultative process in the city of Toronto, this government is putting forward a law that can be amended by the minister with no reference to the legislation. That should give everyone pause. You should be thinking about that, because frankly, if you move from this Legislature setting laws to one person setting laws, we have a real problem in this society.

I will remind those on the government benches that when Mike Harris amalgamated the city of Toronto against the will of the people of the city of Toronto, in the following election they fared very badly. They still held on, but in the city of Toronto they were decimated. Why? Because millions of people don’t take kindly to people running a tank overtop of their democratic rights. They don’t take kindly to it. In fact, they get kind of cranky when you beat them up, take away their rights and ignore their will and impose your own.

Speaker, right-wing populism is a fever dream. In that dream, all kinds of things are jumbled together and all kinds of thoughts and analysis are distorted. I’ve heard members on the government side say that the reason they need to do this is for efficiency; they need to do this so that we’ll get transit built, so that we’ll get housing built. Well, I would point out that the Premier, in question period last week, was saying that no transit has been built in Toronto for the last 20 years. I suggest he take the subway line up to Vaughan. He may notice that a transit line was built.

I suggest that he go to Eglinton Avenue and look at the Eglinton Crosstown under construction. I suggest he go to St. Clair Avenue and ride the streetcar. Those three projects, in the last 20 years, were largely financed by the provincial government. If there is a problem with transit financing and operation in the city of Toronto, it has been far too often that the provincial government has failed to put in the money necessary to move things forward. It is not the problem or fault of the city of Toronto or the decision-makers of the city of Toronto.

It is a question of a province not being willing to finance in the way that it needs to finance.

The Premier referred to a lack of action on social housing. I will point out to the members of the government that it was Mike Harris who downloaded social housing on to municipalities that didn’t have the money to sustain it because they’re trying to operate from a property tax base; they don’t have access to that revenue. Municipalities were never meant to sustain social housing; they don’t have that kind of revenue.

In this province, the former Liberal government did not give the funds to the city of Toronto it needed for social housing. In fact, they were engaged in cutting the funds to the city of Toronto to the tune of 150 million bucks a year. It wasn’t a question of too many politicians; it was a question of the provincial government beating up on the city, downloading costs.

The so-called efficiencies of the Harris era were simply this: “We will take expenses off our books and our shoulders and we will put them on you.” That’s not efficiency; that’s being a deadbeat. That’s being some kind of guy who shows up for dinner, eats everything, walks out, says thank you, does nothing else and leaves you with cleaning up the dishes. That’s what the Harris government did; that’s what this government is doing.

A number of people have said to me—and I think this is not a bad analysis—that this is about making sure that the city of Toronto is controlled more closely by development interests. In the spring, the city of Toronto passed new development charges deeply opposed by the development industry but absolutely necessary for the functioning of the city of Toronto; absolutely necessary in order to provide the infrastructure that will serve the new residents of the city.

You don’t bring in hundreds of thousands of new residents without the need to invest in transit, without the need to invest in sewers, in roads, in schools—all of that. The city of Toronto, acting responsibly, said, “Development should be paying for development. We need the money to actually make the city work.” The development industry was very unhappy with that.

We know very well the Premier’s record on this—very well. During the election campaign he said he would allow the paving of the greenbelt. He got blowback and he pulled back. But the election has passed. The moment of danger to him has passed, but the moment of danger to the people of Toronto, to the city of Toronto, is here today. And those people have been gagged. They will not be allowed to speak before you, legislators. They will not be allowed to make their arguments. They are being cut out. On that basis alone, this time allocation motion should be defeated—on that basis alone.

I’ll say beyond that, in this democracy, for a decision of this magnitude to have 10 minutes of debate per opposition group in third reading is outrageous. This time allocation motion must be rejected.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Further debate?

Mr. Gilles Bisson: I just want to pick up on where my colleague the member from Danforth left off, and that is that this is pretty anti-democratic stuff. Here’s the Ford government, the Conservatives, who are saying, “We’re the government of the people. Don’t worry; we’re here. We’ll take care of you.” And the first chance that they had to hear from the people on the very first bill they did—they time-allocated the previous bill that dealt with hydro executive salaries and that dealt with the cancellation of windmill projects and said, “We’re not going to give the public even a chance to come here and talk to us.” They time-allocated the bill and sent it right off to third reading.

Now they’ve got a bill that’s probably one of the most intrusive pieces of legislation that we have seen in a generation, when it meddles in the elections of the city of Toronto in the middle of an election. The government of Ontario says, “We’re going to change the game. We’re going to just change the game entirely and we’re going to change the size of the council.”

Listen: If the people of Toronto want to change the size of the council, that’s their decision. It’s not a decision that we should be making. Yes, we have the authority, but it’s the decision of the people of Toronto, just as, in the city of Timmins, they decided the size of their council on numerous occasions. They decided if they wanted to be a ward or an at-large system. Those were decisions that the ratepayers, the voters, of the city of Timmins had to make, and it was done by us. It was done by the people of Timmins and done by our municipal council.

This government has decided, “Nah. We’re smarter than all you people living in Toronto. We know what’s best for you.” This is Uncle Joe. Remember Uncle Joe in the Soviet Union—Joseph Stalin, if you don’t remember his name. This is the kind of stuff this is. This is autocracy from the top. This is the person from the top trying to tell the little serfs at the bottom what’s good for them. They say, “Oh, we won a majority.”

Yes, you won a majority government; nobody argues that. I very much respect the British parliamentary system that says that if you win more seats than the other party, you get to form the government and you get to make the decisions. But you have a responsibility as a government to follow the process and to allow people to have their say. The fact you’re not allowing the public of Toronto, who either support this bill or don’t support this bill, to come before a committee to say what they have to say about it says that this is a throwback to the old communist days of the Soviet Union. This is essentially what it is.

Listen: Nobody argues that you don’t have the authority to do what you’re doing. There are people who will argue that in court, and we’ll see where that goes. I respect that you have a decision to make and you will make that decision. But what I expect, as a citizen of this province and as a legislator, is that you’re going to respect the process and allow the public to have their say.

How can you purport to be the government of the people? How can you be the government of the people when you won’t even let the people in the door? You won’t let them in to committee because you say, “We’re smarter than all of you. We’re going to do this because we know we’re right. We got 40% in the last election and we ended up with a majority in the House, and the 40% is giving us the mandate to do what’s going to be imposed on the rest of the 60%.”

Mrs. Gila Martow: That’s not very parliamentary.

Mr. Gilles Bisson: Well, it is very parliamentary what I’m saying, and I challenge you to get up and say that it’s not. Please get up in this debate. I want to see you get up and debate.

Mrs. Gila Martow: I’m saying that it’s unparliamentary.

Mr. Gilles Bisson: You guys can’t even debate your own motion. It has got to the point—

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): A reminder to all members to direct their remarks to and through the Chair. Thank you.

Mr. Gilles Bisson: Through you, Madam Speaker, I challenge any government member to get up and debate this motion. If you guys think it’s a good idea that the public doesn’t have an opportunity to come before committee and do what it has to do when it comes to pronouncing itself on this legislation, then get up and state your case. You tell us why democracy shouldn’t work. You tell us how this is not Joseph Stalin kind of tactics, and we’re prepared to listen to you. This is exactly what it is. Come on. There’s a little thing in the British parliamentary system called democracy, and we have a committee process.

The very fact that this government is not prepared, saying it’s a government of the people, to allow them to come before a committee to pronounce themselves on this bill—I’m sure you’ll find people who will come and speak to it and I’m sure you’ll find a lot of people who come to speak against it, but at least you will have heard what the public has to say.

What’s even more galling: This was not even an election issue. If the government would have campaigned on this—

Hon. Sylvia Jones: Rae days.

Mr. Gilles Bisson: Come on; you didn’t campaign on this. Come on, Comrade Stalin. Listen: Madam Speaker, you didn’t campaign on this. The government at no time in the last campaign said, “We are going to bring legislation that’s going to change the electoral system in the city of Toronto”—never hinted, never said, never even whispered.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): A reminder to all members that we address each other by riding and not by diminutive name. If the member would withdraw.

Mr. Gilles Bisson: If they’re insulted by “Comrade Joe,” I’m sorry—

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): The member will withdraw.

Mr. Gilles Bisson: Withdraw.

My point, Madam Speaker, is that they’re doing the tactics we’ve seen other governments in the past do that are not very democratic. I think that a government that is not prepared to hear the people when it comes to their idea has a big problem. The fact that they didn’t even campaign on this—this just came out of nowhere—I think just adds to the fact that the government is obliged—

Hon. Sylvia Jones: It decreases the size and costs—

Mr. Gilles Bisson: Well, then get up and have that debate.

Madam Speaker, if the government is so incensed about what I have to say this morning, they should get up and defend themselves, at least in a time allocation motion. But they—

Interjections.

Mr. Gilles Bisson: Listen, you’re not even prepared to get up and do the debate. We all know what you guys are trying to do. You just want to shove this thing through the process as quickly as you can.

Well, Andrea Horwath and New Democrats believe that people should be heard. People have the democratic right to be before our institution at committee and to have their say when it comes to this bill. And if the government did not include that in the time allocation, I plan to rectify it now, because I have an amendment to the motion that I would like to read.

I move an amendment to the motion.

Delete everything after “ordered” in the first paragraph and replace with:

... to the Standing Committee on General Government; and

That the Standing Committee on General Government be authorized to meet on Monday, August 20, 2018, from 2 p.m. to 8 p.m. and Wednesday, August 22, from 2 p.m. to 8 p.m. for the purpose of public hearings on the bill; and

That the Clerk of the Committee, in consultation with the committee Chair, be authorized to arrange the following with regard to Bill 5:

—Notice of public hearings on the Ontario parliamentary channel, the Legislative Assembly’s website and Canada NewsWire; and

—That the deadline for requests to appear be 6 p.m. on Wednesday, August 15, 2018; and

—That witnesses be scheduled to appear before the committee on a first come, first served basis; and

—That each witness will receive up to nine minutes for their presentation followed by six minutes for questions from committee members divided equally amongst the recognized parties;

That the deadline for written submissions be 8 p.m. on Wednesday, August 22, 2018; and

That the deadline for filing amendments to the bill with the Clerk of the committee shall be 9 a.m. on Monday, August 27, 2018; and

That the committee be authorized to meet on Wednesday, August 29, 2018, from 9 a.m. to 10:15 a.m. and 1 p.m. to 8 p.m. for the purpose of clause-by-clause consideration of the bill; and

That on Wednesday, August 29, at 5:30 p.m., those amendments which have not yet been moved shall be deemed to have been moved, and the Chair of the committee shall interrupt the proceedings and shall, without further debate or amendment, put every question necessary to dispose of all remaining sections of the bill and any amendments thereto. At this time, the Chair shall allow one 20-minute waiting period pursuant to standing order 129(a); and

That the committee shall report the bill to the House no later than Thursday, August 30, 2018. In the event that the committee fails to report the bill on that day, the bill shall be deemed to be passed by the committee and shall be deemed to be reported to and received by the House; and

That, upon receiving the report of the Standing Committee on General Government, the Speaker shall put the question for adoption of the report forthwith, and at such time the bill shall be ordered for third reading, which order may be called that same day; and

That when the order for third reading of the bill is called, one hour of debate shall be allotted to the third reading stage of the bill with 30 minutes apportioned to the government, 20 minutes to the official opposition, seven minutes to the independent Liberal Party members and three minutes to the independent Green Party member. At the end of this time, the Speaker shall interrupt the proceedings and shall put every question necessary to dispose of this stage of the bill without further debate or amendment; and

That, except in the case of a recorded division arising from morning orders of the day, pursuant to standing order 9(c), no deferral of the second reading or third reading vote shall be permitted; and

That, in the case of any division relating to any proceedings on the bill, the division bell shall be limited to five minutes, except that the division bell for the vote on the motion for third reading shall be 15 minutes.

I give this motion to be tabled directly to our page Adam.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Mr. Bisson has moved:

“Delete everything after ‘ordered’ in the first paragraph and replace with:

“... to the Standing Committee on General Government; and

“That the Standing Committee on General Government be authorized to meet on Monday, August 20, 2018, from 2 p.m. to 8 p.m. and on Wednesday, August 22, from 2 p.m. to 8 p.m. for the purpose of public hearings on the bill; and

“That the Clerk of the Committee, in consultation with the committee Chair, be authorized to arrange the following with regard to Bill 5:

“—Notice of public hearings on the Ontario parliamentary channel, the Legislative Assembly’s website and Canada NewsWire; and

“—That the deadline for requests to appear be 6 p.m. on Wednesday, August 15, 2018; and

“—That witnesses be scheduled to appear before the committee on a first come, first served basis; and

“—That each witness will receive up to nine minutes for their presentation, followed by six minutes for questions from committee members divided equally amongst the recognized parties;

“That the deadline for written submissions be 8 p.m. on Wednesday, August 22, 2018; and

“That the deadline for filing amendments to the bill with the Clerk of the Committee shall be 9 a.m. on Monday, August 27, 2018; and

“That the committee be authorized to meet on Wednesday, August, 29, 2018, from 9 a.m. to 10:15 a.m. and 1 p.m. to 8 p.m. for the purpose of clause-by-clause consideration of the bill; and

“That on Wednesday, August 29, 2018, at 5:30 p.m., those amendments which have not yet been moved shall be deemed to have been moved, and the Chair of the Committee shall interrupt the proceedings and shall, without further debate or amendment, put every question necessary to dispose of all the remaining sections of the bill and any amendments thereto. At this time, the Chair shall allow one 20-minute waiting period pursuant to standing order 129(a); and

“That the committee shall report the bill to the House no later than Thursday, August 30, 2018. In the event that the committee fails to report the bill on that day, the bill shall be deemed to be passed by the committee and shall be deemed to be reported to and received by the House; and

“That, upon receiving the report of the Standing Committee on General Government, the Speaker shall put the question for adoption of the report forthwith, and at such time the bill shall be ordered for third reading, which order may be called that same day; and

“That when the order for third reading of the bill is called, one hour of debate shall be allotted to the third reading stage of the bill, with 30 minutes apportioned to the government, 20 minutes to the official opposition, seven minutes to the independent Liberal Party members and three minutes to the independent Green Party member. At the end of this time, the Speaker shall interrupt the proceedings and shall put every question necessary to dispose of this stage of the bill without further debate or amendment; and

“That, except in the case of a recorded division arising from morning orders of the day, pursuant to standing order 9(c), no deferral of the second reading or third reading vote shall be permitted; and

“That, in the case of any division relating to any proceedings on the bill, the division bell shall be limited to five minutes, except that the division bell for the vote on the motion for third reading shall be 15 minutes.”

We are going to take a five-minute recess to check the orderliness of the amendment.

The House recessed from 0932 to 0937.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): The amendment is in order, so I will entertain further debate on the amendment to government notice of motion number 4 moved by Mr. Bisson. Further debate?

Mr. John Vanthof: It’s always an honour to stand and debate in this House, today on the amendment to a time allocation motion which is quite frankly abhorrent to those of us who believe in democracy.

Just for a bit of background for people, the way it’s supposed to—the government wins a mandate. They win an election. They put forward legislation. Legislation is debated in the House, and typically, it passes second reading and it’s put to a committee. That’s really important because the committee is where people who have an interest can come to the Legislature, the place that belongs to the people, and have their say, put input in and, hopefully, make the legislation better.

Then, after the committee process, although this government has yet to show that they know how to do that, the government should take that valued information from the people—these guys say they’re for the people, but actually you have to take information from the people—and then hopefully make that legislation better with the advice of the people and with the criticism of the opposition, because no one is expecting legislation to be perfect on the first shot. That’s the way it’s supposed to work. That’s the way it’s supposed to work.

We have some support, or we had some support, on that issue when the government was on the opposition side. We have a quote here from the current Minister of Transportation from May 7, 2018, so it didn’t take them very long to get amnesia. From the now Minister of Transportation:

“How can you say that something has been duly considered if you haven’t even allowed the public, the stakeholders—those people who will be most affected by it, those people who will be responsible for carrying it out—the opportunity to offer opinion or views as to how that legislation might be changed, altered, improved, or have some parts of it swept away altogether, because they’re not in the best interests of the people who will be most affected?

“You really have to ask yourself if the government is acting in the best interests of the people”—this is actually funny—“or it is acting in what it considers to be the best interests of itself. Because, you see, it has got itself up against the wall here, as far as timing is concerned. They feel that they need to get this piece of legislation out there because there’s a constituency out there that they want this piece of legislation passed for. They feel it is a good piece of legislation, to go to that group and say, ‘Look at what we’re doing; look at what we’ve done.’”

From the current Minister of Transportation on May 7, 2018—at that point, he had some very, I would say, upstanding views on the role of this Legislature and the dangers of time allocation. Unfortunately, as soon as he came to the government side, he seemed to have forgotten.

Another, from the current Minister of Municipal Affairs, who has carriage of this bill, so he should understand. April 16, 2015: “So again I appeal to” you, “all the MPPs on the government benches to consider carefully the path you’re treading. When you are elected into government, you not only are given power, but you’re also given the trust of the people. Don’t silence the voices, even though they’re opposition voices, by shutting down debate and forcing time allocation.” This is your Minister of Municipal Affairs—

Mr. Gilles Bisson: What happened?

Mr. John Vanthof: What happened?

I come from a long Conservative lineage. The one thing that the Conservatives and the NDP used to share is that at least we stood up for our views. What happened to these two ministers? What happened?

From the current government House leader, who is pushing this time allocation through—again, April 13, 2016, not that long ago. I don’t know if amnesia is setting in. “Sometimes what happens here—my friend from Renfrew–Nipissing–Pembroke describes it as the guillotine coming down and slicing off debate. He makes a very effective sound effect every time the House leader or deputy House leader moves a closure motion. We’ve seen that time and time again. They should not be using a blunt instrument—and a guillotine is a blunt instrument—to pass legislation in this House.”

Again, when they actually had that principle—we didn’t agree with some of the things the Conservatives did but we did believe in that principle and I personally believed that those members who made those statements in this House believed in that principle, but they no longer do. That is incredible.

If you will recall—I’ve mentioned this a couple of times in the House—the throne speech: When we walked in, the band was playing the theme song from Game of Thrones. Now every time I walk in here, I look for the arrow slits. Every series has a score, every movie has a score, and it think this government should have a score, or perhaps their own band.

Hon. Todd Smith: “76 Seats.”

Mr. John Vanthof: Yes. I’ve been thinking of this for a while. Once, Ball of Confusion came on the radio and I thought, “You know, that kind of fits, but not really, because these people aren’t confused.” They’re misled perhaps, but they’re certainly not confused. This is a direct attempt. What they’re doing isn’t confusion.

I drive a lot, and I listen to classic rock. A great tune came on. Speaker, I apologize: I am not a singer, but I am sure you will remember—some of you will know when you hear the lyrics to this. Hopefully I can, without losing the lyrics—oh, there we go.

Hon. Todd Smith: Losing My Religion?

Mr. John Vanthof: Losing My Religion would be a good one, because you seem to have lost your morals. The House leader suggested losing his religion. That would be a good one, but I didn’t think of that one, Speaker.

I was listening to the radio, and I heard it, and the tune was “(Making it work) takes a little longer/(Making it work) takes a little time.” Right? Making it work takes a little longer. When you’re drafting legislation, guess what? Making it work takes a little longer. Making it work takes a little time. What you people are doing—you’ve totally forgotten that, and you’re rushing this stuff through. You’re going to regret it.

Hon. Todd Smith: Who was the band that sang, “Can we get a gong in here”?

Mr. John Vanthof: The House leader suggested that we get a gong. Perhaps we should get a gong, because this government is a gong show.

Interjections.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): I’m going to remind all members to direct their remarks, their refrains, their dancing and their prancing to and through the Chair. Thank you.

Mr. John Vanthof: Thank you, Speaker. I will try and tone it down a bit.

Another issue: Yesterday, in question period, we were talking about one of their signature policies: buck-a-beer. They claimed that there were no financial incentives attached to this, but the LCBO is going to give free advertising and premium shelf space. That is a cost, because anyone else has to pay for that. That is a subsidy. For the people who claim to be representing the businesses of the province to claim that that is not a subsidy and that that is not corporate welfare—come on. Come on.

And this whole buck-a-beer thing—right now, the floor price is $1.25, a buck and a quarter. Where is the buck-and-a-quarter beer? Where is the buck-and-a-quarter beer?

Again, you’ve won the election. It’s time that you guys actually govern like grown-ups and actually use the process the way it’s supposed to be used. There was a quote from the Premier before he was Premier, saying, “We’re not going to be a government for government. We’re going to be a government for the people.” This institution has been developed over hundreds of years with a certain process, and the committee process is where the people get to have their say.

Coming from northern Ontario, we always push to have committee meetings in northern Ontario on issues of northern Ontario, and, you know, we always get frustrated, because it never happens. In this case, the committee hearings can rightfully be held in Toronto, so we don’t understand why you don’t do it. If you’re so proud of this legislation, why don’t you do it?

Interjection.

Mr. John Vanthof: I’m trying to help you, actually, because I’ve got family on that side.

In the immortal words of the theme band for the Ontario Party, Doug and the Slugs—somehow appropriate—

Interjections.

Mr. John Vanthof: If the government is not careful, Speaker, and doesn’t take their job seriously and doesn’t take democracy seriously—again, I quote from Doug and the Slugs—here’s what could happen: “Too bad that you had to get caught, / That’s not like you to lose face. / So sad that you’re not as smart, / As you thought you were in the first place.”

That could very well happen with a government that starts out as arrogant and as undemocratic as this one. It’s galling, Speaker.

Because of that, I would like to move an amendment to the amendment. I would like to delete “That, except in the case of a recorded division arising from morning orders of the day, pursuant to standing order 9(c), no deferral of the second reading or third reading vote shall be permitted; and” and replace with “The votes on second and third reading may be deferred pursuant to standing order 28(h); and”

I give it to page Jamie.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Mr. Vanthof has moved an amendment to the amendment: delete “That, except in the case of a recorded division arising from morning orders of the day, pursuant to standing order 9(c), no deferral of the second reading or third reading vote shall be permitted; and” and replace with “The votes on second and third reading may be deferred pursuant to standing order 28(h); and”

I recognize the member on a point of order.

Mr. Bill Walker: I respectfully ask that you read that in French too, please, Madam Speaker.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): I will wait for direction from the Clerks.

I am happy to entertain further debate on the amendment to the amendment as moved by Mr. Vanthof. Further debate?

I will remind members that I will put the question—

Interjection.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): The amendment to the amendment. Further debate?

Seeing none, I’ll put the question. Mr. Vanthof has moved the amendment to the amendment: delete “That, except in the case of a recorded division arising from morning orders of the day, pursuant to standing order 9(c), no deferral of the second reading or third reading vote shall be permitted; and” and replace with “The votes on second and third reading may be deferred pursuant to standing order 28(h); and”

Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? I heard a no.

All those in favour will please say “aye.”

All those opposed will please say “nay.”

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

There being a division requested, it is deferred until after question period.

Vote deferred.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Orders of the day?

Hon. Todd Smith: No further business, Speaker.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): There being no further business, this House will be recessed until 10:30.

The House recessed from 0955 to 1030.

Introduction of Visitors

Mr. Dave Smith: I’d like to introduce the woman who inspires me on a daily basis to be a better man, my wife, Lorien.

Mr. Norman Miller: I would like to welcome to the Legislature the mayor of my hometown, Bracebridge, Muskoka, Mayor Graydon Smith, who is in the members’ east gallery. Welcome.

Mr. Logan Kanapathi: I’m proud to welcome a few constituents from my Markham–Thornhill riding also to the Legislative Assembly. Welcome to Jessie Wang, Lynn Perrier and Jenny Chen. These wonderful women played a key role in my campaign.

I would also like to say a special thank you to my riding association president, Tammy Mok. Thank you.

Thank you for being here.

Mrs. Robin Martin: I’m rising today to welcome to the Legislature my good friends, and volunteers in my campaign, Juri Otsason, Bernadine Morris and Allan Fabrykant.

Mr. Rudy Cuzzetto: I would like to introduce one of my volunteers, Monika Frejlich, as well as my son Michael Cuzzetto, who will be leaving for university for his first year.

Mrs. Gila Martow: I’m so happy to welcome Pamela and her son Daniel Bielak today to Queen’s Park. They have a group called Crafting for a Cure. They work very hard to raise money for kids who are having cancer treatment in hospitals to have something to do.

Welcome, and I hope you’re going to get the Order of Vaughan this year, Pamela. I’ve nominated you. Thank you for being here.

Hon. Sylvia Jones: It is a pleasure for me to welcome and introduce Brenna Shanahan. Brenna has been helping in my office for the past number of months, particularly related to the implementation of Rowan’s Law. I wish her luck as she returns to Louisville, Kentucky, on her lacrosse scholarship.

Mr. Robert Bailey: I’d like to welcome to the Legislature today five guests from the Horse People’s Alliance of Ontario: Mr. Jim Whelan; his son Marshall Whelan; Mark Williams, a famous driver in Ontario; Bruce Pollock; and Brian Tropea.

Mr. Doug Downey: I would like to introduce two people: first, Barb Shakell, who served as a child protection worker with CAS in Simcoe-Muskoka and is a strong, strong supporter of the party and a force to be reckoned with in women in politics; and my long-time friend Kelly Lassaline, who is also a force to be reckoned with in women in politics and was my campaign manager and one of several teachers who support this party.

Mr. Mike Harris: I’m pleased to introduce today Adam Van Meerbergen from Waterloo. He’s a campus Conservative at the University of Ottawa and has helped with various campaigns in the Waterloo region over the last election—and also his friends, Icaro and Gabriel. Gabriel is actually visiting us from Brazil. Welcome, gentlemen.

Ms. Natalia Kusendova: I’d like to welcome my good friends and nursing school colleagues Diana Gherutchi and Tallique Sutherland. We’ll be later discussing the role of nursing not only at the bedside but also as patient and health policy advocates.

Oral Questions

Curriculum

Ms. Peggy Sattler: My question is to the Premier. How did the Premier decide that pleasing his radical social conservative friends was a higher priority than protecting the human rights of Ontario students?

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m going to start off by cautioning the members on inflammatory language that inflames the House. I heard part of the question, but then with the reaction, I couldn’t hear the whole question. I’m going to allow it.

The Premier, response.

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker: I accept the opposition’s “radical” comments. You know something? I know that the NDP don’t believe in this, but we believe in doing something that they don’t believe in, and that’s actually consulting with parents. I know that’s unusual.

I think they know that the consultation—as they propped up the Liberals for 15 years on every issue, including this one—they went online. They went online and consulted with 16 people after the curriculum was already put together. They believe that’s proper consultation. We believe in consulting with the parents.

Do you know what’s even more important, Mr. Speaker? More important are the math tests. Where our students are, grade 6 math students, 50% of them are failing math. That’s what—

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

Ms. Peggy Sattler: This morning, human rights lawyers were here at Queen’s Park to launch legal action against the Premier’s dangerous plan.

I applaud the work that these advocates are doing. They are speaking up on behalf of students, including an 11-year-old child, who will suffer significant harm if the Premier is allowed to erase gender identity, same-sex families and LGBTQ2 issues from Ontario schools.

Why is this Premier violating the human rights of children across Ontario?

Hon. Doug Ford: I know that the NDP like fear-mongering. But we’re going to actually consult with parents. We’re going to focus on math scores. We’re going to focus on math and science, which we should be focusing on. Again, when half our students are failing math, we have an issue. When the grade 6 students are the lowest in all of Canada—we are the lowest in all of Canada under the old curriculum. We’re going to fix the old curriculum. We’re going to make our students the top in the country.

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

Ms. Peggy Sattler: The 1998 curriculum fails to provide the information that students need to stay safe, and it fails to respect the human rights of Ontario’s students. That is why 30 school boards, representing about two-thirds of all children in this province, have issued formal statements raising concerns about the risks and direct harm that the Premier’s plan will create.

School boards and teachers want to protect the health and human rights of their students. Why doesn’t this Premier?

Hon. Doug Ford: We’re going back to the NDP math. They can’t add up. There are actually, altogether, 76 school boards, and we’re going to consult with the folks at the school boards. But most important, we’re going to consult with the parents.

The number one issue is not the sex ed. It’s math scores. It’s about educating our students. I know the opposition—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Come to order.

Hon. Doug Ford: Anyone before 2014—I guess they just didn’t get it. They didn’t get it. We’re going back to 2014. We’re going to consult with the parents on math, on science, but also on the sex ed. Once we consult with the parents, that’s when we’ll make our decision.

Curriculum

Ms. Catherine Fife: My question is to the Premier. Young children and their families should not have to fight the Premier of this province just to make sure that every child is supported in our classrooms. Why is this Premier forcing families to launch legal challenges just to ensure that the human rights of our kids are protected this September?

Hon. Doug Ford: Mr. Speaker, we’re going to have the most robust consultation this province has ever seen. We’re going to go to all 124 ridings. And do you know what’s really ironic? I’m going to go into some of these ridings where people are dead against the sex ed; they’re dead against our kids failing math.

There are actually people who were elected in certain areas who I know personally. In Brampton, for example—my friends over in Brampton, they know; both candidates from Brampton know how their people feel in Brampton: They’re dead against it.

We’re going to pay Brampton a visit, we’ll go pay Scarborough a visit and see what those parents actually think—because I know what those parents think: They’re dead against it. They want to be consulted. They’re actually keeping their kids out of school.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Ms. Catherine Fife: Well, I want you to know that the people of Waterloo care about consent and they care about the safety of the kids in our schools.

Every day, more and more people are speaking out against the Premier’s dangerous plan to drag students back to 1998. Some 30 school boards now have issued statements of concern. They’re taking a stand, and I’m very proud of those school boards.

Also, 1,800 health care professionals say the Premier’s plan puts children at risk, and now the Premier is facing legal action from the families of children who will be harmed by his actions.

Why is this Premier not interested in protecting the health and the human rights of all Ontario students?

Hon. Doug Ford: Mr. Speaker, through you: Do you know what puts our children at risk? When we don’t consult their parents. That’s what puts the children at risk. What puts our children at risk is when we don’t consult with the parents and we listen to a bunch of politicians and a bunch of activists. That’s what puts our children at risk.

What we should be doing is consulting with the parents, which we’re going to do right across 124 ridings. We’re going to reach out to the parents. We’re going to actually reach out to the experts. We’re going to reach out to anyone who’s involved, even the teachers. I know they don’t believe in reaching out to teachers. I talked to teachers throughout the campaign. They don’t agree with the curriculum. They don’t agree with the math curriculum. They don’t agree with the sex ed curriculum. They don’t agree—

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

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Premier will take his seat. Stop the clock.

Start the clock.

Final supplementary.

Ms. Catherine Fife: What I would like to say to this Premier is that this issue is so important. It’s too important to play politics with.

According to one parent, having—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I apologize. Stop the clock. The government side has to come to order. I have to be able to hear the member asking the question.

Restart the clock.

The member for Waterloo.

Ms. Catherine Fife: Thank you very much.

According to one parent, having the 2015 curriculum at her child’s school taught him how to have a voice and to acknowledge that there’s nothing wrong with him. But the Premier’s plan to scrap the health curriculum and erase same-sex families, gender identity and consent from Ontario classrooms will hurt students across Ontario.

Why is this Premier sacrificing the human rights of students just to return a political favour to his socially conservative friends?

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker: I don’t remember ever saying anything that the other member said we were saying in the campaign. It’s fear-mongering. They try to put fear into the people of Ontario, the students of Ontario.

Only 1,600 people were consulted. Over 14 million people are in this province; 1,600 people were consulted. The numbers are fudged. Something is wrong here.

I can promise you one thing, Mr. Speaker. We’re going to be travelling around this province, and we’re going to hear from the parents, we’re going to hear from the teachers, we’re going to hear from the experts, and they’re going to decide. We’ll bring it back into the House, and then we will have the proper math curriculum, we’ll have the proper sex ed curriculum.

Municipal elections

Mr. Gilles Bisson: My question is to the Premier.

Premier, your government trounced on the democratic process by making a unilateral decision to slash Toronto city council without any real public consultation. Now you’re using time allocation to force through the legislation while preventing the public from appearing before committee to have their say. Public consultation and the use of committee is a democratic process that has long been cherished.

How can you purport to be a government of the people when you won’t let them into the building to have a say about their legislation?

Hon. Doug Ford: Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

Hon. Steve Clark: Thank you, Speaker, for giving me the opportunity, through you, to speak to the member.

Again, we were very, very clear—crystal clear—during the campaign that we were going to reduce the size and costs of government.

I’m pleased that the NDP actually want to talk about Bill 5 rather than the drive-by smears that they’ve been doing in this House for the last two days.

Bill 5 is going to provide a streamlined city council. It’s going to provide an efficient and effective council. It’s going to provide $25-million savings to the people of Toronto over the next four years. It’s going to provide, on October 22, the opportunity to have a streamlined, 25-member council with the same boundaries that are for federal MPs, and the same boundaries that are for provincial MPPs. It’s good public policy.

Interjections.

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

Supplementary?

Mr. Gilles Bisson: On this bill, you have been anything but clear. You never raised it in the last election once. Nobody saw this thing coming. All of a sudden, it got announced, one day out of the blue. You’re saying that you’re not going to allow the people of this province and the people of these affected cities to come before public committee and have their say. You can’t pretend to be a government of the people when you won’t open the front door of the Legislature and allow the people to come in and present at committee.

Will you open the door and will you allow the people into this committee structure to have their say?

Hon. Steve Clark: Speaker, through you to the member: It’s pretty rich coming from the NDP, who just ran a campaign that was anti-police, anti-veteran, anti-poppy. It’s pretty rich coming from this opposition, when they continue to have a radical and offensive agenda. This—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The members will take their seats. I cannot hear the Minister of—

Interjections.

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

Once again, I have to inform the House that I have my earphone in and I have the volume at full blast and I can’t hear the member who has the floor. That can’t be allowed to happen.

Restart the clock.

Next question.

Community safety

Mr. Michael Parsa: My question today is for the Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services. Mr. Speaker, our government for the people has remained committed to public safety across this great province. The daily duties of a police officer are dangerous, and the brave men and women of our police services deserve to perform their duties safely and effectively.

As members of this House are aware, Ontario has seen an increase in the number of gun-and-gang-related violence taking place on our streets. Gun violence is a menace to our streets and will not be tolerated by this government. Speaker, could the minister please update the members of this Legislature on how his ministry will tackle the problem of gun-and-gang-related violence?

Hon. Michael A. Tibollo: I want to thank the member from Aurora–Oak Ridges–Richmond Hill for this very important question.

At the outset, I just want to thank our first responders for the great work that they do to keep our communities safe.

It’s time to put public safety first. Our government for the people is listening to police and investing real money to help them protect families from gang and gun violence. During the election campaign, we promised to restore the $12 million in funding that the previous government cut from the fight against gangs and gun violence. Today, we’re investing $25 million in new funding. Unlike the members of the official opposition who have continually insulted the men and women of our police services—

Interjections.

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

Supplementary.

Mr. Michael Parsa: I would like to thank the minister for his response in this incredibly important topic.

This announcement of additional funding to the police services is needed to address the problem of gun-and- gang-related violence in Ontario, especially within the city of Toronto. Mr. Speaker, as a member of this government for the people, I am proud to stand here today and know that we have kept another promise we made to the people of Ontario. The brave men and women of our police services desperately need the tools and resources to address gun violence, and I know the minister will continue to deliver on this government’s commitment to ensuring public safety across this great province.

Again to the minister: What actions will your ministry be taking to ensure that the streets of Toronto and all of Ontario and the many communities remain safe?

Hon. Michael A. Tibollo: I thank the member for his question. Mr. Speaker, our government has kept the promise we made to improve public safety within this great province. This new investment in our police services will allow Toronto Police Service to purchase equipment and innovative technologies for their important task of tackling gun and gang violence within the city of Toronto. The time for talk is over, and we’re delivering real action to keep our neighbourhoods safe. We’re challenging the municipal and federal governments to also step up to do their part and support our police services.

Mr. Speaker, we will continue meeting with our community safety partners over the coming weeks so that we can find solutions necessary to protect Ontarians from being the victims of senseless violence and to keep our first responders safe while performing their duties. Promise made; promise kept—promise doubled.

Interjections.

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

Next question.

Social assistance

Ms. Judith Monteith-Farrell: To the Premier: When did the government inform participants of the Basic Income Pilot program that the program was to end, and have they been informed when they will no longer receive the income they have come to count on?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Premier? The question was addressed to the Premier.

Hon. Doug Ford: Mr. Speaker, we have a little issue. For the people at home, we’re dealing with a serious issue on the other side of the aisle. We had one of the members from Essex just tell us he’s going to throw a land mine and blow this place up. That’s it. I think the cheese has slipped off the cracker with this guy. When he is threatening to blow this place up, that’s a serious, serious issue we’re facing. He said we’re bringing a land mine—

Interjections.

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

Supplementary question?

Dawna George-Morrison, whose father was a World War II veteran and her mother a victim of a residential school, was on disability and caring for her eight-year-old grandson. On basic income, she could buy food: fruit, meat. Now she will have to go back to food banks.

What does the Premier say to Sherry and Dawna?

Hon. Doug Ford: Minister of Community and Social Services.

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: I appreciate the member’s question. It gives me an opportunity to update the House on the things that I said yesterday that clearly the member opposite wasn’t listening to.

First of all, I want to assure her that Sherry and Dawna are being listened to. We have heard them. I have a staffer in the gallery. We want to make sure that when we wind this program down—and the details will emerge in the next couple of weeks on how we’re going to do that—it will be a compassionate and lengthy runway, so people will still receive their cheques for the next few months.

But I will tell you this: This is a program that, if it were fully implemented, would cost $17 billion, raising the HST to 20%, an additional 7%. That would impact the poor of this province, the vulnerable. Right now, we have one in seven people who are living in poverty, and our job, as a government for the people, is to lift them up, to give them a pathway to success and, when they’re able to work, get them into that pathway.

But when they don’t have those skills and when they’re unable to do that, we have to support them. That’s why we hit the pause button on the Liberal plan that was patchwork and fragmented, and decided to give a 1.5% increase—

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

Next question?

Refugee and immigration policy

Mr. Kaleed Rasheed: My question today is for the Minister of Children, Community and Social Services. Minister, I was shocked to read the story of convicted sex offender Adesanya Prince, who is in Canada illegally. I see that Mr. Prince, who has been convicted on child pornography charges, will be in Canada’s prison system while he awaits extradition.

The federal government, through Ministers Blair, Goodale and Hussen, claims there is no crisis at the border, yet more than 1,000 illegal border crossers come into Canada each month. Many of these illegal crossers come across at Roxham Road. Minister, I understand that this convicted sex offender also slipped across the border into Canada at Roxham Road. Our border appears to be a path for illegal crossers—

Interjection: Asylum seekers.

Mr. Kaleed Rasheed: —and now sex offenders are—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Thank you. Minister of Children, Community and Social Services, responsible for immigration.

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: I want to say thank you to the member for raising this very important issue. I heard the member opposite refer to that person as an asylum seeker. He is a registered child sex offender, he crossed into our country at an irregular port of entry in Quebec and now we are paying for him to be here. This is a crisis, and it is because of the federal government’s failed policies at our border. The government has acknowledged that by ensuring that there were not one, not two, not three, but four ministers in the federal government responsible for this crisis.

This is a federal decision, and I will be going to Ottawa on Monday to ask for our $200 million in costs that continue to escalate in this province as a result of what’s happening at the border. This should be a shock and a concern for every Ontarian, when a child sex offender can cross the border into our country and expect social services in this province.

Interjections.

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

Supplementary?

Mr. Kaleed Rasheed: Minister, thank you for that answer. I can’t believe anyone would suggest that this isn’t a crisis. I appreciate your support and your position on this important matter.

It would be a huge step in the right direction if Ministers Blair, Goodale and Hussen would finally admit that they don’t have a solution to this crisis. Now I hear the illegal border crossers will be put up in hotels for what I understand could be years.

Minister, have the college facilities been vacated, or will students now be negatively impacted? As well, could you please tell me if the federal government is paying millions per month to house illegal border crossers indefinitely?

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: I appreciate the question. It gives me an opportunity to update this House.

As you know, Speaker, last weekend, Angus Reid found that two thirds of Canadians agree with the Ontario government’s approach on this, and every single Premier in the country agrees with our Premier in how we’re approaching this. That is why I’ve gone personally to Ottawa, and I will go again, to talk about the crisis at our border and the crisis in our emergency shelter system.

I know that we are a welcoming society, but our patience has been tested, as has our generosity, as a result of these failed federal policies that five ministers are now presiding over and passing as a hot potato. I’m going to simply say thank you to Centennial and Humber College for their generosity over this period of time.

I also just want to point out that the feds need to pay for their failed policies. Two hundred million dollars is a lot of money, Mr. Speaker, and that’s Ontario’s money. We need that back, so I will be going on Monday to speak to those federal ministers and demand that we are compensated.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Stop the clock. The House will come to order. The member for Scarborough Southwest will come to order. The Premier will come to order. Start the clock.

Next question?

Municipal elections

Mr. Peter Tabuns: Speaker, my question is to the Premier. The Premier didn’t campaign on cancelling democratic elections, and he seems to have taken everyone, including his own caucus, by surprise. It was especially surprising because of news reports that the Premier’s office was getting engaged in the Peel regional chair election.

The Premier claims to have consulted people about this particular piece of government policy. Did the Premier consult with any former members of this House about regional chair elections?

Hon. Doug Ford: Minister of Municipal Affairs.

Hon. Steve Clark: To the member for Toronto–Danforth: During the campaign, we talked about respecting taxpayers’ dollars. The Premier talked to tens of thousands of people during that campaign. We were delivered here in this House with a strong mandate to get things done, and that’s exactly what we’re doing. We passed the Urgent Priorities Act, which ended the longest strike at a university in Canadian history. The kids are going back to York University. We’re on our way to reducing gas prices by 10%.

This bill, Bill 5, will reduce the size of Toronto city council and press the pause button on four elections in four regions. Again, a Toronto council made up of 25 members will be a streamlined council. It won’t be a dysfunctional council. It will be—

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

Supplementary?

Mr. Peter Tabuns: I’m not surprised the Premier evaded that question. I’m going to go back to this, though.

Again to the Premier: Before the Premier decided to interfere in democratic elections—something he didn’t run on and none of the members across the House ran on—there were media reports that the Premier’s people were trying to get someone—anyone—to run against Patrick Brown.

Was the Premier in touch with Charles Sousa about this matter?

Hon. Steve Clark: Again, this has got nothing to do with the bill on the order paper. It’s got nothing to do with government policy. It’s just another drive-by smear by the NDP.

Interjection.

Hon. Steve Clark: You can howl all you want, but I’ll again remind you that we’re not the party that stood up against the police, against veterans, against the poppy. We weren’t that party. We were the party—

Interjections.

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

Next question.

Ring of Fire

Mr. Michael Gravelle: My question is to the Minister of Energy, Northern Development and Mines and Indigenous Affairs.

Speaker, the Ring of Fire is truly a multigenerational economic and social development resource project that will positively impact the economy all across the north. I believe that the minister will agree that two of the keys to this project moving forward are the building of regional infrastructure to bring the minerals to market and a continued partnership with First Nations to see that benefits go to their communities.

We know that three First Nations are working on all-season roads to open up access to the provincial highway network and the Ring of Fire. When we were in office, we committed $1 billion to ensure that these access roads are indeed built.

The government’s support for these all-season roads is totally crucial. My question for the minister is this: Will the minister commit to making the necessary investments to see that the all-season roads are built? And will the minister continue to work in partnership with these willing First Nations to move the Ring of Fire forward?

Hon. Greg Rickford: Thank you for the question. I appreciate the member opposite’s efforts over the past; unfortunately, they haven’t accomplished much. I was involved, obviously, in the other place in my capacity as the minister for FedNor, and from time to time, we had a project or two that we were able to work successfully on in an effort to open up corridors for hydro and road access to First Nations communities, improve all-season roads and actually get a road into the Ring of Fire, to create jobs and economic development for Indigenous communities.

Instead, what we’ve seen is a bit of a bog. These communities are now no longer involved in the direct activity, the benefit and the opportunity—save and except for a couple—of actually participating in the things that the Ring of Fire can offer.

I’m pleased to say that, moving forward, the Ring of Fire is a top priority for us and those communities and all of northern Ontario.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Mr. Michael Gravelle: Thank you very much for the response, Minister, and I’m very pleased that it’s a top priority for your government, as it was for ours. I think it’s important to reiterate the question.

The willing First Nations who are indeed working to move those all-season access roads forward are going to be crucial to the development of the project. Certainly, all other northern communities are extremely keen on this, and I’m hoping that the minister, when he’s at the AMO conference, will be meeting with northern communities to discuss, and update them on, this project.

But my question again is: Will you make the investment necessary to move that all-season road access forward? And will you continue to partner with the First Nations who are willing partners in this project?

Hon. Greg Rickford: The answer can be yes, if the member is willing to admit that there is a dramatic deficit of road access to that region and that for 15 years, very little got done in that respect. Okay? Let’s call it for what it is.

The Ring of Fire represents a legacy opportunity, not only for the jobs it will create in mining extraction, not only for the economic opportunity of Indigenous communities and municipalities’ smelting opportunities, but the legacy infrastructure required to support that development is as big as the prospect of mining extraction activities itself.

We’ve seen that when Indigenous communities get involved in the economic development aspects of this, like Webequie, a small business centre that played a pivotal role in the exploration activities, like communities farther to the south who are now partners with Noront to make sure that they get jobs, economic opportunities and infrastructure that can create and contribute to vibrant, dynamic Indigenous communities and municipalities—

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

Interjections.

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

Restart the clock.

Next question.

Municipal elections

Miss Christina Maria Mitas: My question is to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Day after day, the opposition makes outrageous and, frankly, inappropriate claims about Bill 5. It’s what they always do: try to put a negative spin on the great work that we’re doing. We know that the real reason the NDP opposes Bill 5 is because they love big government. Higher taxes and job-killing red tape is what they want; it’s just in their DNA.

But former government members have also made claims—claims that we did not consult. That’s just wrong. The Premier spoke to thousands of Ontarians and Torontonians during our recent campaign. They sent us here to govern on June 7 with a mandate to reduce the size and cost of government; and if I may say so, we’re doing a bang-up job.

Can the minister tell the House what the former government’s record is on consulting before—

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

Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing?

Hon. Steve Clark: I want to thank our outstanding member from Scarborough Centre for that very good question.

Speaker, I want to set the record straight. The former government meddled in this year’s Toronto election. They did it quietly, without consultation, by slipping

schedule 2 into this year’s budget bill. It amended the City of Toronto Act, allowing council to pass a bylaw adding three councillors for this year’s vote. Previously, to change the council composition, the deadline was December 31 of the previous year.

Like the NDP, if you give the Liberals a chance, they’ll always increase the size and cost of government. Over here, we’re respecting taxpayers, and I’m proud. An unmanageable, unaffordable 47-member council is just another Liberal mess that we’re going to clean up.

Interjections.

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

Restart the clock.

Supplementary?

Miss Christina Maria Mitas: Thank you for that response, Minister, and for explaining how the previous government failed to consult taxpayers in Toronto about changing the rules at the last minute in order to increase council size.

Unlike that, the streamlined, lower-cost city council that we are proposing in Bill 5 has been debated for days by everyone here. You and the Premier have been open and accountable by answering questions both in the House and in the media, something that the previous government simply did not do.

I am curious about something, though, Minister, and forgive my possible ignorance. When did the budget pass to give city councillors the go-ahead to add more city councillors to the payroll, and how did it coincide with this year’s election?

Hon. Steve Clark: I want to again thank the member for that excellent question. The budget passed on May 8, one week into the municipal election campaign. The previous government acted to push their agenda to allow a retroactive increase in the size and cost of Toronto council during the campaign period.

It was a little rich to hear, yesterday, the member for Don Valley East stand up and criticize us when that MPP from Toronto was a member of cabinet in a government that changed the rules during the game a few short months ago. I bet he didn’t tell constituents that he was acting to add more councillors to the bill.

There’s a word for that behaviour, Speaker, but I don’t think I’m going to use it.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Stop the clock. The House will please come to order. We still have 24 minutes.

Start the clock.

Next question.

Opioid abuse

Mr. Terence Kernaghan: My question is for the Premier. London is grappling with an opioid crisis. London’s Regional HIV/AIDS Connection in the Middlesex-London Health Unit runs a temporary overdose prevention site that has been a saving grace for my community.

Supervised injection sites save lives. They’re a proven harm reduction tool for combatting this public health crisis.

Experts in London are ready to talk. Staff in London are ready to talk. Community members and people with lived experience in London are ready to talk. The Minister of Health and Long-Term Care has been invited to tour the site and to talk to experts. We’re left wondering: Why is a professional, well-run organization being left in the dark?

This site is only temporary and will cease to exist come August 15 unless action is taken now. Will this government grant the much-needed extension for the temporary site?

Hon. Doug Ford: Minister of Health.

Hon. Christine Elliott: Thank you very much for the question. I’m certainly aware of the situation with the supervised injection site in London, Ontario. I do plan to visit. I understand they’re doing some great work.

As the Premier has said in the past, we want to look at the evidence to make sure that the continuation of all the supervised injection sites is going to be of benefit to people, to save lives and to help introduce people into rehabilitation. For the particular site that you’re speaking about in London, we are looking at a temporary situation to extend time for us to be able to continue with this investigation. That is what I’m hoping to do within the next few days, to make sure that we can do that. We don’t want them to stop the work while our investigation is undergoing.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary.

Mr. Terence Kernaghan: Back to the Premier: There are six days left. My constituents deserve a solid answer. According to the RNAO, there is robust peer-reviewed evidence that these services are saving lives and making a difference. The evidence is ready. All you need to do is to take a look at it.

To date, staff members have already prevented seven overdoses. Addiction touches everyone and can tear families apart. Staff are saving lives every day, connecting individuals with their community and helping put them on the road to recovery. This site must continue to exist past August 15. Again, there are six days left. Will this government commit here and now to grant an extension for the temporary site past the August 15 deadline?

Hon. Christine Elliott: The short answer to the member is yes. I said that in my previous response. We understand that there is work that is going on there that needs to continue while we conduct our review. We understand there is a big opioid crisis in this situation. I understand that that clinic has been very well used and is doing some very good work.

We are going to continue our work, looking at the RNAO report and the reports of others, to make sure that the site—for this site in London, as well as the other supervised injection sites across the province—continue. It will also be part of our ongoing review, our mental health and addictions review that we’re undergoing, which we are putting $3.8 billion into over the years. We want to make sure that all Ontarians who need help receive that help.

Beverage alcohol sales

Mr. Randy Pettapiece: My question is for the Minister of Finance. This week, our government put the people first, and we kept our promise to bring buck-a-beer back to Ontario. As of August 27, any brewer can choose to lower the price for a beer to $1. I’m proud to be part of a government that’s working to help people keep more of their hard-earned money in their pockets.

Speaker, can the minister provide more details about our plans to return buck-a-beer to Ontario?

Hon. Victor Fedeli: I want to say thank you to the member from Perth–Wellington for the question. Speaker, when you get right down to it, our buck-a-beer plan is simply to encourage competition among Ontario’s brewing industry and saving consumers money.

Let’s remember that before 2008, buck-a-beer was popular with both consumers and brewers. It was a win-win, and then, of course, the Liberals got their hands on it, supported by the NDP. They added a layer of red tape when they raised the minimum beer price and made buck-a-beer illegal.

Well, effective August 27, in time for Labour Day weekend, our government is going to lower the minimum beer price to $1 for any beer under 5.6% alcohol by volume. Promise made; promise kept.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Mr. Randy Pettapiece: Back to the ever-hard-working Minister of Finance: It’s important to realize that the Premier’s buck-a-beer challenge is just that: a challenge. It’s voluntary. It’s going to be completely up to each brewer whether or not they want to lower their prices, and there are no financial incentives being provided here.

Minister, can you explain how the government is going to implement buck-a-beer in a fiscally and socially responsible way?

Hon. Victor Fedeli: Thank you again for the question. We’ve kept our promise and done our part by lowering the price floor, allowing the beer industry to participate in the Premier’s challenge. Any brewer that wants to join can join in on this great marketing opportunity. Instead of handouts and subsidies, we’re issuing the buck-a-beer challenge. The LCBO will work collaboratively with any brewer wishing to participate, with no costs incurred by the Ontario taxpayers.

And let’s be clear, Speaker: We remain unwavering in our commitment to road responsibility and road safety. We’re going to trust consumers to make mature and responsible decisions, but there is zero tolerance for those who do not. We promised to bring buck-a-beer back to Ontario at no cost to the taxpayers and we delivered. Promise made; promise kept.

Opioid abuse

Mrs. Jennifer (Jennie) Stevens: Mr. Speaker, St. Catharines saw more than a 300% increase in overdoses in the last year and has one of the highest opioid overdose death rates in the province. Mayor Sendzik and St. Catharines city council unanimously called for a safe injection site for the city in January. The future of this site, like other sites in the province, is now in limbo. Does the Premier support a safe injection site for St. Catharines?

Hon. Doug Ford: Minister of Health.

Hon. Christine Elliott: Thank you very much to the member for the question. As I indicated in a previous question, we are doing an examination of supervised injection sites, the ones that are already open, to understand the benefits and the basis of the evidence for them to be carried on and for, perhaps, new injection sites to be opened in the future.

I can’t comment on a secure supervised injection site for St. Catharines until we’ve conducted our research and I’ve presented the recommendations to the Premier on whether the evidence supports continued extension of supervised injection sites in the province.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary.

Mrs. Jennifer (Jennie) Stevens: Again to the Premier: Niagara regional associate medical officer of health Dr. Andrea Feller points out that a map of the region’s worst OD rates lines up with the region’s greatest needs for decent housing and income. Will the Premier continue to bulldoze over evidence-based solutions to combat the opioid crisis and poverty, or will he support a provincially funded safe injection site for St. Catharines and Niagara?

Hon. Christine Elliott: We certainly know that there is an opioid problem across Ontario, and it’s particularly bad in the area where you live. We want to make sure we put the right programs and services in place to be able to save people’s lives but also to introduce them to rehabilitation wherever we can.

That is why we are undertaking an extensive addiction and mental health review to make sure we put those programs and services into place, whether they’re supervised injection sites or other treatment facilities. That is work that we’re going to continue over the next number of months. We invite you to participate in that process, because it is important for all Ontarians that we develop a comprehensive system that serves children to youth to adults to seniors throughout all phases of their lives. We want to make sure that we put those provisions in place and do the right thing.

Firefighting in northern Ontario

Mr. Ross Romano: My question is for the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry. We continue to read and see stories in the media talking about the devastation that forest fires are causing throughout central and northern Ontario. I know your ministry and the emergency responders and front-line workers are dedicating everything they have to fight these fires. Minister, can you please tell us how our government is helping to support all of those men and women to ensure that they have all the necessary resources they need to fight these fires?

Hon. Jeff Yurek: I thank the member from Sault Ste. Marie for that question. This government is committed to ensuring that the province has the necessary resources to continue to fight the forest fires in northern and central Ontario. Yesterday the PC government, under the leadership of Premier Doug Ford, announced $100 million in additional funding to continue to support emergency forest firefighting for the 2018 fire season.

As I’ve mentioned previously in this House, the 2018 fire season is one of the worst in Ontario’s history. The hot, dry conditions and accompanying lightning storms are expected to continue through most of the summer and quite possibly into the fall.

Our number one priority remains the same day in and day out, and that’s the safety of the public and the protection of communities and private property. This additional funding that we’ve committed to will ensure we continue to have the necessary resources there for our front-line workers.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Mr. Ross Romano: Thank you, Minister. I am so very happy to hear how our government is so committed to ensuring that our emergency responders and front-line workers remain safe and protected and that they can ensure that our people are safe and protected.

There are reports in the media suggesting that progress is being made and that many people in northern and central Ontario are very encouraged by some of the improvements in the fire situation over the last week or so. Could you please provide an update to us with respect to the fire situation?

Hon. Jeff Yurek: Thanks very much for that supplementary question. While crews and support staff continue to make progress on the fires across the province, there still are approximately 126 active fires in the province in various stages of control.

In particular, I’m very pleased to announce the status of Parry Sound 33 has been upgraded to “being held.” Crews have been able to maintain the perimeter and work towards the interior, finding hot spots. They’re taking action to extinguish them and to reduce the size of the fire. In other good news, people from the Henvey Inlet First Nation have returned to their homes. We’re actively working with communities and other agency partners to discuss when others can safely return to the area.

I do want to note, however, that this fire is still active and travel restrictions continue to be in place. We’re asking people to co-operate with emergency personnel and listen to their direction. We will continue to fight these fires aggressively on the ground and in the air. The $100 million in additional funding will help us sustain these efforts to manage and suppress the fires.

Again, thank you to the front-line workers who are protecting public—

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

Interjections.

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

Restart the clock.

Next question.

Mental health services

Ms. Teresa J. Armstrong: My question is to the Premier. During National Addictions Awareness Week in 2013 the Deputy Premier said, “We have young people with addictions problems who can’t sit on a waiting list for treatment for two years.” In the five years since the Deputy Premier raised this issue, wait-lists have ballooned to unimaginable lengths and supports have been stretched beyond the breaking point. So I was shocked that this government would look at this crisis and choose to cut mental health funding by $330 million per year.

Given the crisis in mental health, how does the Premier justify cutting services for people who are in desperate need of support?

Hon. Doug Ford: Minister of Health.

Hon. Christine Elliott: I thank the member for the question, although I disagree with it entirely.

First of all, what we are actually doing is adding money to the mental health and addictions system. We’re adding $1.9 billion to match the $1.9 billion that’s being advanced by the federal government. That $3.8 billion over 10 years is a lot of money, and it’s going to allow us to do a lot of work together to create a connected system instead of the piecemeal bits and pieces that we had under 15 years with the Liberals. I’m not surprised that nothing has improved in the last five years, because they didn’t put their minds to it and they didn’t create a system.

We are going to change that. We are going to make sure that we speak with people who have lived experience, with the experts, and with people in a number of ministries who are involved in this, because it’s not just the Ministry of Health; it’s about 12 different ministries. That’s the work that we’re going to do over the next short period of time.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Ms. Teresa J. Armstrong: Back to the Premier: At the same time this government is cutting mental health funding, they are giving a six-figure salary to their rich friend—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The government side will come to order.

Interjections.

Ms. Teresa J. Armstrong: Speaker, can I please get some order so that I can actually deliver my question in some civility in this House?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member is quite right. I have to be able to hear. The government side needs to come to order.

Back to the member.

Ms. Teresa J. Armstrong: Thank you, Speaker. At the same time this government is cutting, they are giving a six-figure salary to their rich friend Rueben Devlin to duplicate the job of the Minister of Health. This is simply shameful and inefficient for this government.

Will this government stop making people in crisis pay to pad the wallets of Conservative friends and instead support my motion and commit to funding mental health, addictions and supportive housing by at least $2.4 billion over the next—

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

Hon. Christine Elliott: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would say, through you, to the member that just because you say something time and time again, it doesn’t make it any more true on the 50th time you say it than on the first time you said it.

I think it’s really important for the people of Ontario who are watching these proceedings to understand that what we are doing is adding to our mental health and addictions funding a record amount of money, $3.8 billion, to create a more comprehensive system, to make sure that we have the community capacity to serve people with mental health and addiction needs and to make sure that we can build housing so that they will have a safe place to live. There is a lot of work to be done, and that’s a lot of money to do it with.

We are adding to the system, and that is the most important thing—

Interjections.

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

Restart the clock.

Next question.

Pickering nuclear generating station

Mr. David Piccini: My question is to the Minister of Energy. Nuclear energy is a safe, clean and reliable source of electricity in our province, a source that meets over 50% of our electricity needs. Mr. Speaker, 14% of that is provided by the Pickering nuclear generating station.

The Pickering nuclear generating station is vital to the Durham region and my riding of Northumberland–Peterborough South. In fact, over 4,500 jobs in the region depend on this facility—jobs that would have been lost had the NDP won that last election.

This government is committed to extending Pickering’s operating licence until 2024. Can the minister provide an update on the status of this licence and explain what actions this government is taking to protect jobs in the province of Ontario?

Hon. Greg Rickford: Great question. I want to thank the member for Northumberland–Peterborough for that important question.

Nuclear power is the backbone of our electricity system. It produces over half of Ontario’s electricity. The Pickering nuclear generating station alone provides power to 1.5 million homes every day. That’s why I am pleased to inform this Legislature, and in particular the member from Pickering–Uxbridge, that the Pickering nuclear generating station has received approval from the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission to continue to operate until 2024. This licence to continue to operate will keep 4,500 good jobs in Durham region and another 3,000 jobs across the province. That’s 7,500—

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

Supplementary question.

Mr. David Piccini: Thank you to the minister for his leadership on this file.

Further to my last question, this announcement is great news for the people of Durham and Northumberland. They know—that’s why they gave us this mandate—that they would have lost their jobs under the reckless NDP.

This announcement doesn’t only help protect jobs; it’s also great news for Ontario ratepayers. Through this government’s leadership in ensuring Pickering is operational until 2024, Ontario families, small businesses and job creators will save hundreds of millions of dollars in electricity. Promise made; promise kept.

Can the minister tell the members of this House—

Interjections.

Mr. David Piccini: He’s doing such a great job. Can the minister tell the members of this House what impact this announcement will have on all Ontarians and why he’s so energized to save jobs in Ontario?

Hon. Greg Rickford: Thank you for that question. It’s true the Premier made a commitment to the people of Ontario to keep the Pickering station operational until 2024. Wait for it, Mr. Speaker: Promise made, promise kept.

This extension will save Ontario’s electricity customers up to $600 million, alongside protecting 7,500 good jobs in our province—7,500 jobs that the anti-nuclear democratic party would have eliminated. Pickering nuclear provides 14% of our province’s electricity every day. The continued operation until 2024 is expected to contribute over $12.3 billion to Ontario’s GDP. I’m proud to say that we’re doing all of this in a safe and reliable facility, Mr. Speaker—one of the safest facilities we have.

One of our government’s core commitments is to keep more money in people’s pockets. Promise made; promise kept.

Carding

Mr. Kevin Yarde: My question is for the Premier. An investigation has shown that Black and brown individuals are stopped by police at a rate of five to 10 times more than the rest of the population. The previous government could have banned the practice of arbitrary street checks, but they didn’t.

Today, I will introduce a motion to end the practice of carding, or what are also known as street checks, in the province once and for all. Will the Premier support this motion?

Hon. Doug Ford: Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services.

Hon. Michael A. Tibollo: Thank you for the question. As we’ve always stated, public safety is of paramount concern to this government. The Premier has been clear from day one on this matter, and we will not be bringing back carding.

As you know, I believe in giving our law enforcement officers the tools they need to get the job done. I will listen to our front-line officers about the resources they need, and I will make sure that we’re working with communities to ensure that we’re building trust between our police and the communities they serve.

Mr. Speaker, our government for the people includes every person in this great province, and we remain committed to enhancing and ensuring public safety for all Ontarians across this great province. Ontario is an inclusive province where all are respected, no matter their background, nationality, faith or race.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Mr. Kevin Yarde: We know how this went the last time we asked the government if they would end police use of carding.

Does the Premier support the use of carding or street checks by police, yes or no?

Hon. Michael A. Tibollo: As we’ve stated in the past, public safety is of paramount concern to us, and we want to ensure that the police officers who serve our communities have the tools they need to conduct their work. In order for the front-line workers to do their work, they need resources. As you know, today we’ve committed to $25 million in additional funding.

As you can appreciate, we require police to work in communities, we require police to engage with people in the communities and we’re giving them the tools to be able to do that. In the long run, what we’re trying to do is ensure that communities are safe and that individuals have the confidence not only in our government to do what’s right for them but also to ensure that they feel safe and are able to enjoy our festivals, to enjoy the streets, to be able to walk freely. That’s what—

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

Interjections.

Members will take their seats.

Next question?

Government’s record

Mr. Bill Walker: My question is to the Minister of Government and Consumer Services. Minister, we campaigned as PCs on promises to put money back in people’s pockets, clean up the hydro mess, bring back accountability and trust, create good jobs and reduce hospital wait times.

Minister, can you tell me what you and your colleagues are doing to make these promises made, promises kept?

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Did the minister hear the question?

Hon. Todd Smith: Thank you, Speaker. I did hear that question loud and clear, and I thank the member who is sitting right next to me for that question.

It’s a very good question because it’s a rare opportunity for the Ontario Legislature to sit here during the summer months in such close proximity to the election of June 7. The one thing that Premier Ford wanted to do after winning the election—with a decisive majority, I might add—was to get back to work here at Queen’s Park and start to fulfil some of the promises that we made during that election.

To that end, we have already started to clean up the Liberal hydro mess. We put new leadership in place and new board governance at Hydro One. We’re reducing the cost of electricity by cancelling renewable energy projects that were going to drive up the cost of electricity by almost $800 million. We got kids back to school at York University for this fall. We’re unwinding the cap-and-trade program. We’re even selling beer for a buck now in Ontario, Mr. Speaker—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): That concludes the time we have this morning for question period.

Birthdays

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Bruce–Grey–Owen Sound on a point of order.

Mr. Bill Walker: I’d just like to wish Sullivan, one of the pages here, a happy birthday, on Saturday.

For those pages who may not be with us here next week, thank you so much for your service.

One of our members, MPP Baber, is also having a birthday today.

Visitors

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Attorney General on a point of order.

Hon. Caroline Mulroney: I’d just like to welcome my children to the House for the first time: Lewis, Pierce and Miranda. They get the opportunity to see what all that door-knocking meant to their mother.

Correction of record

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Minister of Children, Community and Social Services on a point of order.

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: I wanted to correct my record. The individual who illegally crossed the border was detained in Quebec.

Deferred Votes

Time allocation

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): We now have a deferred vote on the amendment to the amendment to government notice of motion number 4 by the member for Timiskaming–Cochrane relating to allocation of time on Bill 5,

An Act to amend the City of Toronto Act, 2006, the Municipal Act, 2001 and the Municipal Elections Act, 1996.

Call in the members. This is a five-minute bell.

The division bells rang from 1142 to 1147.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I would ask the members to please take their seats. Is everyone in their seat? I think they are.

Earlier today, Mr. Vanthof moved that the amendment to government notice of motion be amended by deleting “That, except in the case of a recorded division arising from morning orders of the day, pursuant to standing order 9(c), no deferral of the second reading or third reading vote shall be permitted; and” and replace it with “The votes on second and third reading may be deferred pursuant to standing order 28(h); and”.

All those in favour of Mr. Vanthof’s motion will please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.

Ayes

Armstrong, Teresa J.

Begum, Doly

Berns-McGown, Rima

Bisson, Gilles

Bourgouin, Guy

Burch, Jeff

Fife, Catherine

Fraser, John

French, Jennifer K.

Gravelle, Michael

Harden, Joel

Hassan, Faisal

Hatfield, Percy

Hunter, Mitzie

Kernaghan, Terence

Mamakwa, Sol

Mantha, Michael

Miller, Paul

Monteith-Farrell, Judith

Morrison, Suze

Natyshak, Taras

Rakocevic, Tom

Sattler, Peggy

Schreiner, Mike

Singh, Gurratan

Singh, Sara

Stevens, Jennifer (Jennie)

Tabuns, Peter

Taylor, Monique

Vanthof, John

West, Jamie

Yarde, Kevin

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): All those opposed to the motion will please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.

Nays

Anand, Deepak

Baber, Roman

Babikian, Aris

Bailey, Robert

Bethlenfalvy, Peter

Bouma, Will

Calandra, Paul

Cho, Raymond Sung Joon

Cho, Stan

Clark, Steve

Coe, Lorne

Crawford, Stephen

Cuzzetto, Rudy

Downey, Doug

Dunlop, Jill

Elliott, Christine

Fedeli, Victor

Fee, Amy

Ford, Doug

Fullerton, Merrilee

Ghamari, Goldie

Gill, Parm

Hardeman, Ernie

Harris, Mike

Hogarth, Christine

Jones, Sylvia

Kanapathi, Logan

Karahalios, Belinda

Ke, Vincent

Khanjin, Andrea

Kusendova, Natalia

Lecce, Stephen

MacLeod, Lisa

Martin, Robin

Martow, Gila

McDonell, Jim

McKenna, Jane

McNaughton, Monte

Miller, Norman

Mitas, Christina Maria

Mulroney, Caroline

Nicholls, Rick

Pang, Billy

Park, Lindsey

Parsa, Michael

Pettapiece, Randy

Phillips, Rod

Piccini, David

Rasheed, Kaleed

Rickford, Greg

Roberts, Jeremy

Romano, Ross

Sabawy, Sheref

Sarkaria, Prabmeet Singh

Scott, Laurie

Simard, Amanda

Skelly, Donna

Smith, Dave

Smith, Todd

Surma, Kinga

Tangri, Nina

Thanigasalam, Vijay

Thompson, Lisa M.

Tibollo, Michael A.

Triantafilopoulos, Effie J.

Wai, Daisy

Walker, Bill

Wilson, Jim

Yakabuski, John

Yurek, Jeff

The Clerk of the Assembly (Mr. Todd Decker): The ayes are 32; the nays are 70.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I declare the motion lost.

Motion negatived.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Are the members ready to vote on the amendment to government notice of motion number 4? I heard some noes.

There being no more deferred votes, this House stands recessed until 1 p.m. this afternoon.

The House recessed from 1151 to 1300.

Introduction of Visitors

Ms. Doly Begum: It’s my honour to introduce, and actually welcome, some friends from Dallas, Texas, who are here: Tazul Islam, Mahmuda Islam, Aniqa Islam, Farah Nishal and Imaan Rafan. Welcome, guys.

Members’ Statements

Autofest Oshawa

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Member for Oshawa.

Ms. Jennifer K. French: Thank you, Speaker. This summer, I invite you and folks from across the province to come and visit Oshawa. This year, the Motor City Car Club is once again hosting our annual world-famous Autofest. This year is the 25th Autofest, and it will be held at Lakeview Park on Saturday, August 26 and Sunday, August 27.

Every year, Autofest draws classic car fans and families from all over to check out entries from across Canada. Each year, we expect about 10,000 people to come to experience Autofest. Classic car enthusiasts gather, enjoy and celebrate Oshawa’s rich automotive history and bright future.

Lakeview Park is a fantastic space that becomes a sea of classic cars, new friends and great music. There are over $5,000 in cash prizes, a 50-50 draw and a draw for a classic car. Bring the kids to hang out in the kid zone and make memories at one of the most amazing events I have ever been part of.

As I mentioned, the Motor City Car Club hosts this massive event. Our community appreciates the work they do with the help of all of the Autofest sponsors. Funds raised support Grandview Children’s Centre. Through the years, Autofest has raised over $250,000 for Grandview Kids.

Again, I hope everyone comes to Oshawa this August for the weekend of the 26th and 27th to enjoy Autofest at Lakeview Park. This year, we are celebrating 25 years of Autofest, and we hope that all of you will join us.

Events in York South–Weston

Mr. Faisal Hassan: York South–Weston is known for its events, from our annual Santa Claus Parade, now in its 39th year, our Weston Farmers’ Market, also in its 39th season, to our wonderful summer theatre in Little Avenue park.

Weston has high standards, and that is exactly what they did with their second Weston Buskerfest. What started out as a one-time event to celebrate Canada’s 150th birthday was so well received that it has now become an annual event in Weston.

Buskerfest is a free event, and everyone is welcome. The event was well organized and is a lot of fun. Large crowds were on hand along Weston Road north and south of Lawrence last Saturday to watch an entertaining set of buskers captivate audiences.

This was Weston’s second year of Buskerfest and, by all accounts, it was a huge success. Crowds filled the corner of Weston and Lawrence to watch musicians, fire eaters, puppet shows, artists get to work and much more.

Attendees at this year’s event were amazed by a bevy of incredibly talented performers. As the decadent sounds of pan drums danced through the air, performers captivated onlookers.

Philip Alexander

Mr. Percy Hatfield: Last weekend, I had the pleasure of once again attending our Emancipation Gala. It’s a fundraiser for the North American Black Historical Museum out in Amherstburg.

We shared in honouring Phil Alexander with a lifetime achievement award. Phil is a former associate dean for the faculty of engineering at the University of Windsor. He was one of the museum’s founders back in 1975. The museum was established as a way to help young members of the Black community remember their roots and learn the stories of their ancestors.

Amherstburg was one of the first Canadian stops on the Underground Railroad.

Phil Alexander has held every executive position on the museum’s board of directors at one time or another. He has also volunteered to raise money at bingos, chaired several committees and supported his community in many ways.

About 20 years ago, Phil Alexander worked on the Nazrey Church restoration project, which helped the church get the designation as one of Canada’s national historic sites. He served on the police commission in Windsor. He’s been a member of the employment equity advisory committee for our public board of education. He even served six years as a board trustee with the Ontario Science Centre.

In his spare time, Phil has been a volunteer with the multicultural council, Big Brothers, the Y—I don’t have enough time to list all of his community volunteer time, Speaker, but I know you will join me in saying: Phil, well done. Well deserved, my friend. You set an example for all of us.

Northern transportation

Mr. Michael Gravelle: The recent announcement by Greyhound that they will be ending passenger bus service west of Sudbury on October 31 has shaken all of us in northern Ontario. Many people in the northwest, certainly, who rely on that service are looking for alternatives that can fill the void. Motor coach services are vital in our part of the province, and I believe that the government has a role to play in finding a solution to this rather grim situation.

In the Northern Ontario Multimodal Transportation Strategy, one of the key elements is the provision of enhanced inter-community bus services throughout the north, with the Ontario Northland Transportation Commission—the ONTC—extending its services to northwestern Ontario, particularly to fill the gaps that cannot be met by private transportation companies.

It’s my hope that the Minister of Northern Development and Mines and the Minister of Transportation will follow up on that strategy and ensure that the ONTC extends its motor coach services to the northwest in order to fill the gap left when Greyhound ceases its services at the end of October.

While I am very pleased that Kasper Transportation in Thunder Bay intends to expand their passenger bus services in the northwest—and our hat goes off to them—the truth is they simply cannot meet all the needs in our part of the province, and we need to fill that gap. Certainly, by continuing to partner with the ONTC, these needs can be met, and I strongly call on both ministers to see that that happens.

Tree preservation

Mr. Joel Harden: I rise today to offer a statement of congratulations to residents in Ottawa Centre who are part of a movement in Ottawa, and I’m sure it’s a movement shared across our great province. There’s a movement in Ottawa Centre to save the urban tree canopy. We know that a lot of people want to live downtown, and we know that people support responsible development in the downtown. But as that happens, we have to make sure that the beautification that exists all over our great cities and towns maintains itself.

What I’m proud to tell you is that Tom Deadman, who is a terrific volunteer and canvasser in the campaign of which I was privileged to be a part, spearheaded an organizing drive in the course of five days, gathered 800 signatures, hit over 400 doors and managed to convince the developer in question, the city of Ottawa and his councillor to take the right position and maintain trees on his parents’ property, one of which was 156 years old and the other 134 years old. He managed to maintain those trees for the future.

That is, to me, how change can really happen. It’s community-driven change. It’s people taking politics into their own hands. I’m inspired to say that Tom, his father, Richard, and his mom, Carol, were all part of our campaign. They gained the door-knocking skills, the canvassing skills, and it’s so honouring and appreciative for me to see that applied in practice to such an astonishing result. Richard, Carol, Tom: Well done.

Introduction of Bills

Zebra Mussel Scan Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur la surveillance des moules zébrées

Mr. Bisson moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 22,

An Act to require the Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks to discharge the responsibilities under subsection 15 (1) of the Ontario Water Resources Act to determine the zebra mussel content of Chain Creek, Chain Lake, Chain Lakes, The Chain of Lakes, Chainy Creek, Chainy Lake, Chair Lake; Chalet Creek, Chalet Lake, Chalice Lake, Chalk Bay, Chalk Creek, Chalkend Lake, Chalk Lake, Chalk River, Challener Lake, Challener River, Challis Lake, Chalmers Lake, Chamandy Lake, Chamberlain Lake, Chamber Lake, Chambers Lake, Champagne Lake, Champlain Creek, Champlain Trail Lakes, Chance Lake, Chancellor Lake, Chandos Lake, Change Lake, Chanley Lake, Channel Lake, Channel Lakes; Green River, Greenrod Lake, Greens Bay, Green’s Creek, Greenshields Lake, Greenshore Lake, Greensides Lake, Greens Lake, Greenstone Rapids, Greensward Lake, Green Tree Lake, Greenwater Creek, Greenwater Lake, Greenwich Creek, Greenwich Lake, Greenwood Lake and Greenwood River / Projet de loi 22, Loi visant à exiger que le ministre de l’Environnement, de la Protection de la nature et des Parcs assume ses responsabilités en application du paragraphe 15 (1) de la

Loi sur les ressources en eau de l’Ontario pour établir la quantité de moules zébrées dans les cours d’eau suivants : Chain Creek, Chain Lake, Chain Lakes, The Chain of Lakes, Chainy Creek, Chainy Lake, Chair Lake; Chalet Creek, Chalet Lake, Chalice Lake, Chalk Bay, Chalk Creek, Chalkend Lake, Chalk Lake, Chalk River, Challener Lake, Challener River, Challis Lake, Chalmers Lake, Chamandy Lake, Chamberlain Lake, Chamber Lake, Chambers Lake, Champagne Lake, Champlain Creek, Champlain Trail Lakes, Chance Lake, Chancellor Lake, Chandos Lake, Change Lake, Chanley Lake, Channel Lake, Channel Lakes; Green River, Greenrod Lake, Greens Bay, Green’s Creek, Greenshields Lake, Greenshore Lake, Greensides Lake, Greens Lake, Greenstone Rapids, Greensward Lake, Green Tree Lake, Greenwater Creek, Greenwater Lake, Greenwich Creek, Greenwich Lake, Greenwood Lake et Greenwood River.

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

First reading agreed to.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member can give a brief explanation of his bill.

Mr. Gilles Bisson: Mr. Speaker, on the explanatory note, the purpose of this bill is to require the Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks to discharge the responsibilities under

section 15(1) of the Ontario Water Resources Act to determine the zebra mussel content of specific waterways named in this bill.

Zebra Mussel Assessment Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur l’étude du problème des moules zébrées

Mr. Bisson moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 23,

An Act to require the Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks to discharge the responsibilities under subsection 15 (1) of the Ontario Water Resources Act to determine the zebra mussel content of Greer Creek, Greer Lake, Greers Bay, Greggio Lake, Greggs Lake, Gregory Bay, Gregory Creek, Gregory Lake, Grehan Lake, Greig Lake, Gremm Lake, Grenadier Creek, Grenadier Lake, Grenadier Pond, Grenfell Lake, Grenier Lake, Grenville Lake, Greske Lake, Greta Lake, Gretchel Creek, Gretchel Lake, Gretel Creek, Gretel Lake, Grew Lake, Grew River, Grey Duck Lake, Grey Lake, Grelava Lake, Grey Owl Bay, Grey Owl Lake, Green Creek, Greengrass Lake, Greenheart Creek, Greenheart Lake, Greenhedge Lake, Greenhill Lake, Greenhill Rapids, Greenhill River, Greenhorn Bay, Greenhue Lake, Greening Lake, Greening’s Bay, Greenish Creek, Greenish Lake, Green Island Bay, Green Island Lake, Green Lake, Green Lakes, Greenland Lake, Greenlaw Lake, Greenleaf Creek, Greenleaf Lake, Greenlee Lake, Greenmantle Lake, Greenmantle River, Greenock Creek, Greenock Lake, Greenough Harbour, Greenpike Lake, Gravel Lake, Gravel Lakes, Gravelly Bay, Gravelpit Lake, Gravel Pit Pond, Gravelridge Lake, Gravel River, Gravenor Lake, Graves Lake, Graveyard Creek and Graveyard Lake / Projet de loi 23, Loi visant à exiger que le ministre de l’Environnement, de la Protection de la nature et des Parcs assume ses responsabilités en application du paragraphe 15 (1) de la

Loi sur les ressources en eau de l’Ontario pour établir la quantité de moules zébrées dans les cours d’eau suivants : Greer Creek, Greer Lake, Greers Bay, Greggio Lake, Greggs Lake, Gregory Bay, Gregory Creek, Gregory Lake, Grehan Lake, Greig Lake, Gremm Lake, Grenadier Creek, Grenadier Lake, Grenadier Pond, Grenfell Lake, Grenier Lake, Grenville Lake, Greske Lake, Greta Lake, Gretchel Creek, Gretchel Lake, Gretel Creek, Gretel Lake, Grew Lake, Grew River, Grey Duck Lake, Grey Lake, Grelava Lake, Grey Owl Bay, Grey Owl Lake, Green Creek, Greengrass Lake, Greenheart Creek, Greenheart Lake, Greenhedge Lake, Greenhill Lake, Greenhill Rapids, Greenhill River, Greenhorn Bay, Greenhue Lake, Greening Lake, Greening’s Bay, Greenish Creek, Greenish Lake, Green Island Bay, Green Island Lake, Green Lake, Green Lakes, Greenland Lake, Greenlaw Lake, Greenleaf Creek, Greenleaf Lake, Greenlee Lake, Greenmantle Lake, Greenmantle River, Greenock Creek, Greenock Lake, Greenough Harbour, Greenpike Lake, Gravel Lake, Gravel Lakes, Gravelly Bay, Gravelpit Lake, Gravel Pit Pond, Gravelridge Lake, Gravel River, Gravenor Lake, Graves Lake, Graveyard Creek et Graveyard Lake.

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

First reading agreed to.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member may make a brief explanation of his bill.

Mr. Gilles Bisson: The purpose of this bill is to require the Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks to discharge the responsibilities under

section 15(1) of the Ontario Water Resources Act to determine the zebra mussel content of specific waterways named in the bill.

Ministry of Community and Social Services Amendment Act (Social Assistance Research Commission), 2018 / Loi de 2018 modifiant la

Loi sur le ministère des Services sociaux et communautaires (Commission de recherche sur l’aide sociale)

Mr. Paul Miller moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 24,

An Act to amend the Ministry of Community and Social Services Act to establish the Social Assistance Research Commission / Projet de loi 24, Loi modifiant la

Loi sur le ministère des Services sociaux et communautaires afin de créer la Commission de recherche sur l’aide sociale.

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

First reading agreed to.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I recognize the member to explain his bill.

Mr. Paul Miller: This bill amends the Ministry of Community and Social Services Act to establish the Social Assistance Research Commission. The commission recommends social assistance rates and makes other recommendations about social assistance policies. The commission consists of people with expertise relevant to the commission’s work.

Zebra Mussel Report Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur le rapport concernant les moules zébrées

Mr. Bisson moved first reading of the following bill:

Bill 25,

An Act to require the Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks to discharge the responsibilities under subsection 15 (1) of the Ontario Water Resources Act to determine the zebra mussel content of Graveyard Rapids, Gravy Lake, Grawbarger Lake, Grawbarger’s Rapids, Graydarl Lake, Graydon Lake, Gray Lake, Grayling Lake, Graymud Lake, Gray Rapids, Grays Bay, Grays Creek, Grays Lake, Grayson Lake, Grayson River, Grays River, Graystone Lake, Graytrout Lake, Grazing Lake, Grazing River, Great Lake, Great Mountain Lake, Great North Bay, Great Portage Lake, Great South Bay, Grebe Lake, Greb Lake, Green Bay, Greenbough Lake, Green Bug Lake, Greenbush Lake, Green Creek, Grants Lake, Granzies Lake, Grape Lake, Graphic Creek, Graphic Lake, Graphite Lake, Grapnel Bay, Grapnel Creek, Grapnel Lake, Grasett Lake, Grass Creek, Grasser Lake, Grass Hill Lake, Grass Lake, Grassy Bay, Grassy Creek, Grassy Lake, Grassy Portage Bay, Grassy River, Gratton Creek, Gratton Lake, Grave Bay, Grave Creek and Grave Lake / Projet de loi 25, Loi visant à exiger que le ministre de l’Environnement, de la Protection de la nature et des Parcs assume ses responsabilités en application du paragraphe 15 (1) de la

Loi sur les ressources en eau de l’Ontario pour établir la quantité de moules zébrées dans les cours d’