Ontario Hansard — 5 December 2017 (41st Parliament, 2nd Session)
2017-12-05
Ontario — Debates (Hansard)
role="main" class="main-container container js-quickedit-main-content" id="main-content">
December 5, 2017
41st Parliament, 2nd Session
< Previous sitting day
Next sitting day >
Hansard Transcripts
Votes and Proceedings
Orders and Notices
Hansard Transcripts 2017-Dec-05 (PDF)
L131 - Tue 5 Dec 2017 / Mar 5 déc 2017
LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO
ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO
Tuesday 5 December 2017 Mardi 5 décembre 2017
Orders of the Day
Safer Ontario Act, 2017 / Loi de 2017 pour plus de sécurité en Ontario
Introduction of Visitors
Oral Questions
Energy policies
Mental health services
Energy policies
Energy policies
Automobile insurance
Automobile insurance
Sexual violence and harassment
Government’s record
Group homes
Climate change
Transportation infrastructure
Autism treatment
Automobile insurance
Health care
Deferred Votes
Construction Lien Amendment Act, 2017 / Loi de 2017 modifiant la
Loi sur le privilège dans l’industrie de la construction
Safer Ontario Act, 2017 / Loi de 2017 pour plus de sécurité en Ontario
Visitor
Introduction of Visitors
Members’ Statements
Formosa Lions park nativity scene
Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority
University of Toronto Mississauga
Oxford-on-Rideau Tech
Northern transportation
Lakeridge Health
Cole Pearn
Abrigo Centre
International Centre for Human Rights
Reports by Committees
Standing Committee on Government Agencies
Introduction of Bills
Filipino Heritage Month Act, 2017 / Loi de 2017 sur le Mois du patrimoine philippin
Poet Laureate of Ontario Act (In Memory of Gord Downie), 2017 / Loi de 2017 sur le poète officiel de l’Ontario (à la mémoire de Gord Downie)
Motions
Consideration of Bill 160
Statements by the Ministry and Responses
International Volunteer Day
Petitions
Hospital funding
Employment standards
School closures
Child care
School closures
Landfill
Injured workers
Hospital funding
Long-term care
Wasaga Beach
Soins de longue durée
Orders of the Day
Building Better Communities and Conserving Watersheds Act, 2017 / Loi de 2017 visant à bâtir de meilleures collectivités et à protéger les bassins hydrographiques
The House met at 0900.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Good morning. Please join me in prayer.
Prayers.
Orders of the Day
Safer Ontario Act, 2017 / Loi de 2017 pour plus de sécurité en Ontario
Resuming the debate adjourned on November 30, 2017, on the motion for second reading of the following bill:
Bill 175,
An Act to implement measures with respect to policing, coroners and forensic laboratories and to enact, amend or repeal certain other statutes and revoke a regulation / Projet de loi 175, Loi mettant en oeuvre des mesures concernant les services policiers, les coroners et les laboratoires médico-légaux et édictant, modifiant ou abrogeant certaines autres lois et abrogeant un règlement.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Further debate?
Mr. Steve Clark: Point of order.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Point of order, the member from Leeds–Grenville.
Mr. Steve Clark: Can I have a quorum check?
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): A quorum check, please.
The Deputy Clerk (Mr. Trevor Day): A quorum is not present, Speaker.
The Speaker ordered the bells rung.
The Deputy Clerk (Mr. Trevor Day): A quorum is present, Speaker.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Further debate?
Mrs. Lisa Gretzky: It’s my pleasure to rise on behalf of my constituents of Windsor West to speak to Bill 175, the Safer Ontario Act. There’s a lot in this bill, but there are a few key areas that I’m going to focus on in the 10 minutes I have to speak to it today.
I want to recognize my colleague from Essex, who has spoken to this bill at great length and done an incredible job of highlighting the good, the bad and the ugly.
Speaker, I want to start by talking about
schedule 1 of the act, which creates new rules around First Nations policing—specifically the framework for setting up police boards as opt-in or opt-out options. We have some concerns with this
section of the bill, and I’m going to discuss them a little bit later in my remarks. But the essence of this is that First Nations leaders had specifically asked that any legislation at all that comes forward around policing for First Nations would result in stand-alone legislation, not simply piggybacking on other reforms. That is exactly what we see here. Their request was to have separate, stand-alone legislation specifically talking about the needs of First Nations communities. Rather than giving them that opportunity, rather than addressing their concerns, the exact opposite happened and it was rolled into this large piece of legislation.
As we see far too frequently with this Liberal government, it’s a “kitchen sink” piece of legislation. There’s so much stuff in it. There’s some good stuff, and then they throw in a bunch of bad stuff and basically try to corner the other parties into having to pick a side.
You either have to accept all the good stuff and get credit for that, or you have to do what we stand here today doing, what we’re elected to do, which is to draw attention to the stuff in here that is not helpful, the stuff in here that is rolling things back in a bad direction—to stand here and highlight it and potentially not support a piece of legislation because of, as we like to call them, the poison pills in that legislation.
One concern that we have is around the First Nations policing and the fact that that really should have been a stand-alone piece of legislation, as the First Nations wanted it to be. But instead of doing that, it’s rolled into this entire bill. So it’s very difficult to address that particular piece independently.
The other piece I want to point out—and this is probably the one I’m going to focus on the most—is the fact that Bill 175 leaves the door wide open for privatization of some police functions. Imagine that: We have a Liberal government who stands here and says that they support our public services, that they support the idea of publicly owned and publicly funded services, and yet in their 14 years—especially in the last few years; I notice it’s a great big rush before an election to get as much privatization done as they can. But here we have, in a bill, the move towards privatizing some of our police services.
Speaker, what we need is to ensure that our front-line workers, our first responders, our police have every opportunity to receive the training and the skills they need to go out and respond to calls, where they are often put in very dangerous situations. They are often walking into a situation where it may seem like it’s not that bad, and then they get there and suddenly it escalates.
The types of calls they’re referring to today are very different than the types of calls they would have been going to 10 years ago, 20 years ago, 30 years ago. From the police officers who I’ve talked to—and I’ve done a couple of ride-alongs. I’ve done a ride-along with patrol; I’ve done a ride-along with their COAST team. Their COAST team responds directly to those with mental health concerns. They work with those people to try to keep them from getting into the justice system in the first place, to keep them from getting into a crisis and possibly ending up in the justice system or in a hospital.
I’ve talked to them. I’ve talked to lots of police officers. The one thing they need is support from their government. They need to know that when they’re reporting to a call, they have the appropriate training they need to be able to deal with whatever situation comes their way. I know it doesn’t matter about how much training you have; there may be a time when a situation arises where you aren’t exactly prepared for it. I don’t think you can be prepared for everything, but it’s our job—it’s the government’s job—to make sure that they have an opportunity to have the training they need to be as safe as possible when they respond to a call.
Part of that is addressing the different types of calls that they’re going to be going to, whether that is someone who is struggling with their mental health, whether that is someone who has a drug or alcohol addiction.
We’ve seen an explosion of opioid crises across this province and we need to make sure that our police officers are adequately trained to be able to deal with that, to recognize that just because they’ve responded to one call with someone who has some mental health struggles doesn’t mean the next call for someone with mental health struggles is going to be the exact same thing as the call they were just at. Things may have to be handled differently. They certainly need the training to learn how to de-escalate certain situations, to try to avoid something very serious happening and somebody getting hurt or killed.
This is what our police services need. What the police services and the municipalities need is a partner with the government, someone who is going to recognize the needs of the police services and ensure that the services they need, the continuing education courses they need, the mental health supports they need, the generalized health care they need—that all of that is in place, including the funding for it.
Instead of really addressing that, what we see is a Liberal government who in Bill 175 has opened the door to privatizing police services. What that is going to result in—and it’s not just me saying this; this is actually police officers from across the province. I have had numerous constituents who are civilians who have raised concerns around the privatization of police services. Rather than putting the funding and the resources in place to actually support the work that our men and women of law enforcement provide, what they’ve done is they’ve made a move towards privatizing those services. That is the wrong direction to go.
My concern and the concern of police officers and the concern of many constituents—not just mine but across the province—is that once certain aspects of police services have been privatized, there will be decreased oversight, there will be decreased regulation when it comes to the services that those now-privatized services are going to provide, that they’re not going to have the training and support that they’re going to need to deal with some of the very difficult situations that are going to arise, and that that could end up in a very serious catastrophe, for lack of a better word. That is not a direction we should be going in this province; we should be moving forward.
We shouldn’t be doing what the Liberal government is doing, which is rushing to privatize just about anything they possibly can. We saw it with the hydro system. I don’t think there’s anyone in this province aside from the Liberal government who thought it was a good idea to privatize the hydro system, and to now allow Hydro One to move towards prepaid hydro meters, because it’s not going to hurt the government—
Mr. Bob Delaney: Point of order.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): I recognize the member from Mississauga–Streetsville on a point of order.
Mr. Bob Delaney: Speaker, I’m looking at the bill. Pursuant to standing order 23(b), the member has to address the bill, and nothing in the current topic which she is discussing is covered in the bill.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): I appreciate your comments. I have been listening intently and I know that she is going to be making a point with regard to this debate as well.
I will turn it back to the member from Windsor West to continue what’s left of her debate.
Mrs. Lisa Gretzky: Thank you, Speaker. I’m glad that you were listening. The member from Mississauga–Streetsville clearly wasn’t listening to the fact that I’m talking about the Liberal government’s drive to privatize everything they can get their hands on in this province, including hydro and including policing. Anything that they can privatize in this province, they are.
Privatizing our police services—I don’t have much time left—is the wrong direction to be going, and shame on the Liberal government for thinking it’s the right way to go.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Questions and comments?
Mr. Lou Rinaldi: It’s unfortunate that the member didn’t get to say what reflected on the bill as you suggested, Speaker. She ran out of time but I’m sure she was going to talk about the bill.
Speaker, a couple of things I want to add to the debate: We talked about First Nations a little bit, and we want to work with First Nations to establish a board to develop regulations that are appropriate and responsive to their communities.
I also want to refer to the member from Essex who made only one criticism of the changes to First Nations policing: that it wasn’t a stand-alone bill. He claims that’s what First Nations wanted. This bill represents a transformation of policing, where all the changes we are proposing are interconnected in many ways. First Nations leaders have come out in strong support of this legislation. Our government worked hard with First Nations communities to get this right. I haven’t heard anyone complain about this but the member from Essex.
I just want to add to this, Speaker, that one of the consultations before the bill was drafted about a year ago, or even longer—as you know, this legislation hasn’t been revamped in over 25 years—was in my own riding of Northumberland–Quinte West in Cobourg. It was very, very well attended. Frankly, we’ve heard from all sides.
I think what we have here today in this legislation that we’re debating is a balanced approach. Yes, maybe we do have to refine some of things, as we do with any piece of legislation, regardless of who is in power. That’s the purpose of public consultation, public hearings and clause-by-clause during the duration.
So I hope we can move this along. Municipalities are expecting this. Police forces are expecting this. First Nations are expecting this.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Further questions and comments.
Mr. Steve Clark: I want to take an opportunity while we’re debating Bill 175, the Safer Ontario Act, to speak about the men and women of our police services who actually keep us safer—in my riding, the officers with the Leeds-Grenville OPP detachments and also the municipal police forces in Gananoque and Brockville.
This morning, I want to acknowledge one of those officers in particular. Every time a police officer goes to work, they are putting their life on the line for us. There is no easy assignment. There is no routine call for a member of our police services.
But I have incredible admiration for the men and women who patrol our 400-series highways. Constable Kevin Lamacraft of the OPP is one of those heroes, doing that dangerous and demanding work on our stretch of the 401. Constable Lamacraft was recently honoured with two awards: one from St. John Ambulance and the other an OPP commissioner’s citation that was given at last month’s east region awards ceremony. Constable Lamacraft was recognized for his attempt to save a man who had a heart attack on the 401. Sadly, the man died later in hospital, but it was Constable Lamacraft’s quick response and his actions on the side of the highway that gave that man a chance.
I know that “Lammy” would say that it’s all in a day’s work, but it’s important that he and his fellow officers know about how proud we are of what they do for us every day they put on that uniform. It’s something that I think we can’t say enough. As someone who has a son who’s a police officer, albeit in the city of Edmonton, I just wanted to use this opportunity this morning to pay tribute to Constable Lamacraft and those men and women who bravely serve us.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Further questions and comments.
Mr. Taras Natyshak: I’m pleased to join the debate. I want to congratulate my colleague the member from Windsor West.
Ms. Jennifer K. French: Not from Essex.
Mr. Taras Natyshak: Not Essex. I’m from Essex, just to clarify that.
I believe that this bill is fundamentally flawed. The intention of the bill is to clarify oversight and accountability through the mechanisms of the former Police Services Act, which was born through the Loku inquest. What the government has done here is that it has not only taken a heavy hand to the oversight provisions built into the Police Services Act but also opened the doors to privatization. Those two issues are in direct conflict with each other.
If you read the bill—and I would encourage all members of the government to read the bill. It’s 407 pages long. What it does is, it goes hard on the oversight provisions of police, it potentially violates charter rights around employment processes and demotion, and it also has no oversight provisions for potential private companies providing police services. How is that possible? How does that make any sense? Essentially, you’re going to have for-profit rent-a-cops providing police services for our communities without any oversight provisions built into the legislation.
They can do whatever they want, without any ramifications. They might not be hired or contracted on the next job, but this is putting our communities in direct jeopardy. This is compromising the safety of our communities. That’s, again, fundamentally flawed. It defies the principles of good policing and public service.
I think you’re seeing the government backpedal a little bit in terms of the speed with which they’re handling this bill. I hope they’re taking a sober second look at it, because it’s going to be detrimental to the safety of our communities.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Further debate.
Hon. Helena Jaczek: I’m pleased to rise to offer a few remarks in reaction to the third party’s
interpretation of Bill 175. I would say to the member from Windsor West specifically that we are really, really clear: We are not privatizing policing. When you call 911 and you need a police officer, rest assured that a highly trained police officer will be at your door.
Now, of course, what we are looking at is further outlining police responsibilities where their particular skills are needed for the task at hand. We all know that the current Police Services Act already outlines a number of public safety areas where alternatives to a traditional police officer may be used. These include such areas as forensic support, crisis negotiation and crime analysis.
Within our proposed legislation, we specifically state that it prevents for-profit business corporations from delivering police functions except in highly limited circumstances where there is a need for expertise that may not exist within any police service across the province. By outlining policing responsibilities, we will set the parameters for using alternative service providers, like special constables, to provide non-critical services where a threat to public safety does not exist. This will allow our highly trained police officers to focus on core law enforcement responsibilities.
I would like to say that I’m a particular admirer of our York Regional Police services. I think they are one of the pre-eminent services in our province.
I would like to acknowledge the great work that they do, not only in York region, but the other police services boards across Ontario. We know that they are achieving great successes.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Back to the member from Windsor West for final comments.
Mrs. Lisa Gretzky: I’d like to thank all of my colleagues for adding their two minutes’ worth to my comments.
I just want to point out to the member from Northumberland–Quinte West that I actually did talk about the bill. I talked about very important pieces of the bill. I talked about First Nations policing and how we are supportive of what First Nations are asking for. However, the government has rolled it into this legislation, which is something First Nations did not want. I talked about the privatization of our police services, something that is not a good idea, so I said it. Whether the member from Northumberland–Quinte West wants to actually listen to it is beyond my control.
The Liberal members want to get up and talk about me supposedly not talking to the bill, and yet the member from Northumberland–Quinte West got up and was talking about the member from Essex. I’m not from Essex. I’m from Windsor West. Essex: wonderful area, my neighbours. They have incredible representation, but I’m not the member from Essex. Perhaps the government side should actually listen to what is going on in the House.
The Minister of Community and Social Services says that they are very clear on what they are doing; they are very clear in this bill about the fact that they are not privatizing police services. As the member from Essex said in his two minutes, I encourage the government side to actually read their legislation, because it’s in this. It’s in this bill, where it says that they are looking to privatize some of our police services.
Alarmingly, there are provisions in here—there are far too many for me to go through in the time I have left. There are provisions in here to fire police officers at whim because of physical limitations and medical limitations they may have. Rather than having a duty to accommodate, the government has opened the door to fire police officers en masse, at whim.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Further debate?
Mr. Bob Delaney: In the House here, we have been discussing this bill for an extended period of time. I just want to do a little bit of a recap here.
This bill, Bill 175, the Safer Ontario Act, is a bill that builds on a position of strength, because here in Ontario we have some of the finest-trained police officers anywhere, and here in Ontario we continue to be among the safest jurisdictions in North America. In fact, just in the last 11 years, Ontario’s overall crime rate has dropped by 29%, almost a third. Ontario’s violent crime rate has dropped by more than a quarter, by 27%. Since 2005, during the past 12 years, Ontario continues to report the lowest crime rate among all the provinces and territories.
Building on strength, what this bill does is to shift to a collaborative approach to community safety and well-being planning. It outlines police responsibilities and it clarifies community safety service delivery. It enhances police accountability. It strengthens the police oversight system. It supports the sustainability of First Nations policing, and it would also improve Ontario’s inquest system through changes to the Coroners Act. It creates a provincial accreditation framework for forensic laboratories to ensure consistent standards through the new Forensic Laboratories Act.
It assists police in responding to missing persons occurrences where there has been no evidence of criminal activity under the new Missing Persons Act. It goes on and on, but actually, we’ve heard many of these here in the Legislature before.
Earlier, the member from Essex was talking about the importance of reading the bill. I do want it on the record that the member from Essex did not accept a technical briefing on the bill—never replied to it. So can he really claim he knows how the legislation works? That we will leave up to him.
Perhaps we can get to the point here. With more than nine hours of debate and many of the members of this Legislature not merely speaking to the bill but being able to address it in questions and comments, at this point in the debate there’s a great deal of repetition of members making points that other members have made before them, and other members before that. So it’s time that the bill is put to a vote for second reading and, hopefully, is then referred to committee, where some of the work and the suggestions that members have made can actually take place. As a result, Speaker, I move that the question now be put.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Mr. Delaney has moved that the question now be put. Given the fact that there has been nine hours and 20 minutes-plus of debate and approximately 25 members who have spoken, I am satisfied that there has been sufficient debate to allow this question to be put.
Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? I believe I heard a no.
All those in favour of the motion that the question be now put, please say “aye.”
All those opposed to the motion that the question now be put, please say “nay.”
I believe that the ayes have it.
Vote deferred.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): A recorded vote being required, this vote will now be deferred until after question period today.
Orders of the day? I recognize the Minister of Labour.
Hon. Kevin Daniel Flynn: Mr. Speaker, no further business.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): This House now stands recessed until 10:30.
The House recessed from 0928 to 1030.
Introduction of Visitors
Ms. Lisa MacLeod: It’s my pleasure today to rise to introduce a good friend of mine who came for a visit at Queen’s Park with me today: a city councillor in the city of Ottawa, Riley Brockington. Riley, we’re so pleased that you’re here to join us today.
Ms. Daiene Vernile: Please join me in welcoming, from the riding of Kitchener Centre, constituents Andrew Fuller and Keren Fuller, who are visiting today. Welcome.
Mrs. Gila Martow: I’m very pleased to have here today Ezra Avia Amon. She’s a volunteer from Thornhill. Thank you, Ezra, for being here.
Hon. Yasir Naqvi: Speaker, I want to introduce my city councillor, Riley Brockington, who represents River Ward, where I live. I want to welcome Riley as well and thank him for his public service. He ably serves our ward.
Mr. Jack MacLaren: It gives me great pleasure to introduce friends from the Trillium Party of Ontario in the members’ gallery. We have Louise Ewen, who is our candidate from Thunder Bay–Superior North. She flew here to join us for our Christmas lunch today. We have Derek Sharp, who is our candidate for Northumberland–Peterborough South, and Lonnie Herrington, our candidate from Hastings–Lennox and Addington, with his partner, Rob Roddick. We have Anna Ravencroft, from Brampton. We have John Grant, who is the candidate for Brampton South, and we have Bill Oprel, the candidate for Brampton Centre. Welcome.
Mr. Paul Miller: It’s my honour to introduce page captain Erion Keka. This is Erion’s second captain’s job, and it’s very impressive. He’s joined today by his mother, Silvia Keka; his father, Besim Keka; sibling Ariana Keka; sibling Arlind Keka; uncle Fehim Zeneli; and relatives Cyma Zeneli and Rudi Zeneli. All relatives are joining us to watch Erion in action.
Mrs. Cristina Martins: It gives me great pleasure to welcome here today to Queen’s Park students from my great riding of Davenport. The Regal Road Junior Public School grade 5 students will be joining me here today with their teacher Joanna Furley.
Je voudrais aussi dire bienvenue aux étudiants de l’école secondaire Saint-Frère-André, avec leur professeur Scott Maddigan.
The grade 10 students will be joining me here this afternoon.
Mr. Monte McNaughton: I’m proud to welcome to Queen’s Park today Karen and John Sasko from Ilderton, Ontario. They’re the parents of my legislative assistant, Jena Ross. Welcome to Queen’s Park.
Hon. Yasir Naqvi: Speaker, today our page captain is Javeriar Laskar. I want to welcome her mom and dad, Sabreena Mamtaz and Masudur Laskar, to Queen’s Park.
Ms. Sophie Kiwala: It gives me great pleasure to welcome from my riding of Kingston and the Islands the vice-president of the Ontario Museum Association, Paul Robertson; as well, Petal Furness, Ontario Museum Council president and manager of Grey Roots Museum and Archives; and Braden Murray, OMA councillor and museum educator at the Lake of the Woods Museum. Welcome to Queen’s Park. It’s a great honour to have you here.
Oral Questions
Energy policies
Mr. Todd Smith: My question this morning is for the Minister of Finance. We learned from CBC’s Mike Crawley this morning that the Goreway gas plant in Brampton has overbilled ratepayers to the tune of $105 million. However, Goreway hasn’t repaid every dollar that it gamed ratepayers out of; the numbers are blacked out, so we don’t know. It’s like déjà vu all over again.
How much did Goreway pay back to the government, how much is government letting them keep after they spent years gaming the system, and how are they going to keep this from ever happening again?
Hon. Charles Sousa: The Minister of Economic Development.
Hon. Brad Duguid: I actually want to thank the minister for raising this question this morning. I think it’s an important question.
There is no excuse for any company in this province to ever game the system of anything that the government’s doing. The fact that this matter was found out by the IESO means that the system in place is actually working, because they found out about this some time ago. They fully investigated, they’ve recovered most of the cost, they delivered a $10-million fine—the biggest fine on record—and they posted the report and the record fine on the OEB website, so it’s on the public record.
The minister and the IESO have taken steps to ensure this cannot occur again. In fact, with the market renewal process they’ve put in place, there’s no way this would ever occur again. But I appreciate the minister raising the issue. It’s a valid question.
Mr. John Yakabuski: Minister Smith?
Hon. Brad Duguid: The member, sorry.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary.
Mr. Todd Smith: I thank the member opposite, the minister, for the response today. But the government has appointed a market renewal panel, and you’ll never guess who the chair of the market renewal panel is.
Mr. Jeff Yurek: Tell us. Who is it?
Mr. Todd Smith: It’s an executive at Goreway power.
The Goreway gas plant’s costs were more than every other natural gas station in Ontario combined. Its price to start up was more than twice that of the second most expensive gas plant in the province, but the government has never made them submit itemized expenses and only reviewed their costs when it was too late. This isn’t the Treasury Board president not getting receipts for pizza; this is hydro customers’ bills we’re talking about here in Ontario. The abuse continues.
When is the minister going to make sure Goreway repays the ratepayers of Ontario every last red cent that they are owed?
Hon. Brad Duguid: I am not here to and will not in any way defend the actions that Goreway took. They were caught, most of the costs have been recovered, and a $10-million fine was imposed on them, as it should have been. At the same time, this company has restructured its executive. Their CEO resigned as chair of the working group on December 1, so he’s no longer chair of that working group.
Again, there’s no excuse for this when it comes to a company like this. We will not tolerate it. I’m pleased that the IESO was there and discovered this right off the bat and engaged in a very long and comprehensive study to ensure that the costs were recovered and that a $10-million fine was levied. I think that shows the system was working, as unfortunate as this is.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Final supplementary?
Mr. Todd Smith: The government was alerted about this in 2012, yet it continued well into 2015. We know that as a result of the report at the Ontario Energy Board.
I know this is like the ghost of scandals past over there: Here we have yet another gas plant scandal in Peel region that’s costing electricity customers over $100 million. One Goreway executive, when describing how they were able to game the system, said, “Put a bow on it ... Christmas came early!” This is what was going on at Goreway.
The market surveillance panel warned the government back in 2009 that these programs were ripe for abuse, and the government did nothing, nada, zip. They didn’t do anything about it.
If the minister won’t make sure that the Goreway gas plant has to repay all of the money it took from ratepayers, will he at least apologize for the incompetence of a government that once again failed to look out for electricity customers here in Ontario?
Hon. Brad Duguid: From time to time, whether you’re a private sector organization, a broader public sector organization or you’re a government at any level, sometimes people try to game the system. The key is, number one, to ensure that those folks are brought to justice when that happens. In this case, they’ve been levied a $10-million fine and most of the costs have been recovered.
As well, it’s important that you look at your systems, and that’s exactly what the government and the IESO did to improve the systems. They’ve done that to ensure that this type of gaming cannot occur in the future.
Also, they’ve moved to completely restructure the system, which is this market renewal system that’s being put in place, which will further address any potential for gaming to happen again.
This is an unfortunate circumstance. The key is the government and the IESO responded appropriately.
Mental health services
Ms. Lisa MacLeod: Speaker, good morning. My question is to the Minister of Health.
I again want to ask the minister about the People’s Guarantee commitment to invest $1.9 billion in mental health.
Interjections.
Ms. Lisa MacLeod: This is very important to me, despite the heckles from the Liberal government. That’s because not only is this the largest investment in Canadian provincial history, but it will also build one of the most comprehensive mental health strategies in our province. To do that, we need a historic investment.
I again ask: Will the Liberals join us in making the commitment? Will they invest $1.9 billion in mental health?
Hon. Eric Hoskins: I appreciate the question.
I want to start off by saying how proud I am of how far we have come as a province. All parties in this Legislature, in fact, have pushed past the stigma, and we all agree that we need to do more. But it’s important to take a moment to appreciate how all Ontarians will benefit from that.
The Conservatives have come to the table offering an average of $191 million extra each year over the next 10 years, for a total cumulative investment of $1.9 billion, but I think as a province we can do better. We can aim higher than that. We can work together to truly build the system, reduce wait times and offer more services to those who are in need. We can make it clear that in Ontario, there is no health without mental health.
I’m proud to be part of a government that has increased mental health spending every single year, and I’m happy to speak more in the supplementary.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?
Ms. Lisa MacLeod: The $1.9 billion will go a long way to improve mental health treatment. I didn’t hear that you were going to make that commitment.
Our plan talks about using some of this $1.9 billion for targeted investments in youth and children’s mental health services across the province. I think we all agree that wait times as long as 18 months are unacceptable. This funding would help reduce those wait times for mental health services. We would invest in funding for mental health support services at Ontario colleges and universities.
This is something, I believe, we should and we could all get behind. With that being said, will the government explain why they have refused so far to adopt our $1.9-billion commitment to mental health?
Hon. Eric Hoskins: Mr. Speaker, here’s why I’m happy to answer that question. I’m happy that the party opposite has come forward with a cumulative total of $1.9 billion over the next 10 years, but it’s not historic. In fact, it’s anything but historic, their commitment.
This team, this Liberal government, has put 10 billion additional new dollars into mental health, into the system, in the last 10 years—10 billion new dollars, not $1.9 billion over the next 10 years. That is historic, and that is the legacy we will be continuing.
Today, I am standing and committing that a Liberal government will put forward more than $1.9 billion over the next 10 years.
Interjections.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Be seated, please. Be seated, please.
Final supplementary?
Ms. Lisa MacLeod: Spoken like someone who didn’t end up in an emergency room a month ago to deal with mental health.
You should be very clear: We are talking about $1.9 billion in additional funding. That would be historic. You have not indicated to us—we’re going to keep the funding where it is.
This is what this historic investment is going to do: It’s going to top up elementary and secondary supports to improve mental health and well-being for our students. We’re going to invest in suicide prevention counselling. We are going to bring in services for indigenous populations through a preventative mental health team that specifically deals with indigenous and northern communities. We will increase budgets of Ontario’s designated psychiatric facilities to increase capacity and reduce wait times. I will ask you again, without you making a mockery of this issue: Will you stop talking about the past and start talking about—
Interjections.
Ms. Lisa MacLeod: Will the Liberal government finally—
Interjections.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Stop the clock.
Ms. Lisa MacLeod: Will you guys actually take this seriously for once?
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member from Nepean–Carleton will come to order.
Minister.
Hon. Eric Hoskins: I applaud the member opposite’s commitment to mental health. I applaud the PC Party’s commitment to mental health as well. As with every single member in this Legislature, we are all deeply committed to this issue, but it’s critically important for the public to understand that their commitment is anything but historic. Using the exact same methodology, our new funding for mental health over the last 10 years amounts to 10 billion new dollars invested. Their commitment for the next 10 years dramatically would reduce that; it would flatten the curve of our increases to a mere $1.9 billion.
We are not going to make that commitment. I’m not going to sign their document. As I said earlier, today I am standing and committing that a Liberal government will put forward more than $1.9 billion over the next 10 years, just like we put $10 billion more over the last decade.
Interjections.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Stop the clock. Be seated, please. As I’ve done in the past, the rotations have shown me that we’re in warnings, and we are.
New question.
Energy policies
Mr. John Vanthof: My question is to the Acting Premier. This morning we learned through media reports that a private natural gas plant in Brampton gamed the Liberal government system for managing private electricity contracts. Over a three-year period, the company cost Ontario families and businesses nearly $100 million in what the Ontario Energy Board calls “inappropriate expenses.” That’s $100 million that went onto the hydro bills of everyday families. What is the Liberal government doing to ensure that those families are paid back?
Hon. Deborah Matthews: To the Minister of Economic Development and Growth.
Hon. Brad Duguid: Again, I appreciate the member’s question. It’s tough sometimes when you’re in the third party and the question is asked initially, a response is given and then you have to ask it, but I think it’s important for all of us to pay close attention to these kinds of issues.
Look, there’s no defending a company that tries to game the system. It’s totally inappropriate. I think what we need to do is make sure we have structures in place to ensure that we know what happened and why, and that the appropriate measures are taken to recover whatever losses have been had. The IESO has taken those measures, fully investigated the matter. They’ve recovered most of the costs, and in fact, they’ve delivered a $10-million record fine. I think on the surface that appears appropriate to me.
As well, measures have been taken to ensure that this kind of gaming cannot happen again in the future. There’s also a significant restructuring going on, called “market renewal,” that will further address the gaming issue. I thank the member for the question.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary.
Mr. John Vanthof: The Ontario Energy Board investigation notes that the majority of the $100 million this company received was through the generation cost guarantee program, a Liberal government program. According to the investigation, the private Brampton gas plant’s manipulation of the program was obvious and should have been discovered much earlier.
There should be serious consequences for stealing money from the people of this province, people who are already suffering under the weight of sky-high hydro bills. So I’ll ask again: How will families be reimbursed for the $100 million that the Liberal government paid to this private gas plant in Brampton?
Hon. Brad Duguid: I agree with the member. There should be serious consequences to any person or any company who tries to game governments of any type, or any organization, for that matter. In this case, there was a $10-million fine levied, a record fine. In this case, as well, in answer to his question, the costs have been recovered so taxpayers have been reimbursed for the majority of the costs.
The matter was fully investigated by the IESO. It did take some time to investigate, because, I expect, this is a fairly complex matter. The matter was posted on record, and the fine was posted on the OEB website, which I think is appropriate. As I said, measures have been taken to ensure this doesn’t happen again.
I think the member is quite right to be concerned about this, as we are, as I know the minister is, and it’s an inappropriate action that took place.
I do think, on the surface, what I see so far is the IESO has responded appropriately.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Final supplementary.
Mr. John Vanthof: This information came to light this morning only after the CBC went digging and found the report—there was no fancy press release—which was completed almost a year ago. This $100 million is a massive fraud, and the people of Ontario are the victims. Why did this Liberal government keep this information so quiet and not do a press release, as it does with all other hydro announcements?
Hon. Brad Duguid: Mr. Speaker, the amount recovered, as I said before, is the vast majority of the amount that was lost. In fact, there’s a $10-million fine on top of that, so on the surface it looks as though justice has been done with this company. There is no defending what this company has done. The taxpayer has been reimbursed for the funds, which I think is probably the most important thing.
Also important, Mr. Speaker, is (1) to ensure that the company does pay a price, and they did, but (2) to ensure that this doesn’t happen again. I know that the IESO has taken measures to ensure this kind of gaming could not happen again, and I don’t have the details of what those measures are. I know the minister would probably have that. Also, they’re restructuring the system, so this won’t happen again in the new system.
Energy policies
Mr. John Vanthof: Once again, my question is to the Acting Premier. Private gas plants in Ontario are gaming the Liberal system for payments to the tune of $100 million while the Liberal government keeps the information quiet.
They are also standing by while the privatized Hydro One plans to install prepay hydro meters to get around the current ban on wintertime hydro disconnections. Since we know the Liberal government can direct Hydro One to do things that benefit their party, will the Acting Premier direct Hydro One to do something that will actually help the people of Ontario, and stop the private company from using prepay hydro meters?
Hon. Deborah Matthews: Minister of Economic Development and Growth.
Hon. Brad Duguid: Mr. Speaker, I think sometimes the NDP, when they get a hold of a word, they try to vilify the word. So the word of the week is “prepaid” hydro meters, as though prepaid bills are something that is somehow bad for people.
The fact of the matter is that the minister has made it very, very clear that nobody will be in any way told that they have to have a prepaid meter. It will be a choice. There are folks who, in light of budgeting, would prefer to have their bills prepaid. It gives a choice to consumers to be able to do that. There’s nothing untoward; there’s nothing evil. There’s nothing non-transparent about this—
Interjections.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Wrap up, please.
Hon. Brad Duguid: I don’t know why the NDP would want to take away that choice from consumers, to be frank.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary.
Mr. John Vanthof: Speaker, let’s be clear: Prepay meters will hurt vulnerable Ontarians. They take away the option of working out a payment
schedule if families get behind on their bills, and instead force them to feed the meter or go without heat during the winter.
The Premier and her Liberal government seem quite willing to direct Hydro One’s activities when the result is of benefit to the Liberal Party. Why won’t they do the same when the benefit would be for struggling Ontario families?
Hon. Brad Duguid: It’s just not true, Mr. Speaker. What the member is saying is just completely false. No residential customer will be without power during the winter months regardless of the type of meter used. That’s just a bogus argument—I guess trying to vilify a word called “prepaid” meters.
Mr. Speaker, there are all kinds of circumstances where consumers will prepay their bills. Sometimes it’s a budgeting issue. Sometimes consumers prefer to do that so that they don’t fall behind or, if they’re on a commission type of salary, to ensure that they have a little bit of room left. Some people even prepay their taxes to governments to ensure that, indeed—it just helps them with their budgeting. It’s a choice for consumers; they have to opt in. Nobody will ever be forced to do this. It’s not evil. There’s nothing that affects vulnerable people in any way about this. It just gives them another option.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Final supplementary?
Mr. John Vanthof: The Liberal government’s defence of prepaid hydro meters is mind-boggling. Their inability to detect a $100-million fraud is beyond belief. The bottom line is that everyday families are paying for these failures of privatization in our hydro system.
Why is this Liberal government spending its time defending the private electricity system that clearly is not working in the best interests of Ontario families?
Hon. Brad Duguid: It’s a two-part question. We wouldn’t even be talking about this Goreway issue at all if the matter hadn’t been detected, so I’m not sure what the member is talking about. He says that the matter hadn’t been detected.
If the matter had not been detected, then the IESO wouldn’t have launched an investigation. If the matter hadn’t been detected, then the IESO would not have recovered the majority of the costs. If the matter hadn’t been detected, then the IESO wouldn’t have registered a $10-million record fine.
What the member is saying, Mr. Speaker—I actually find mind-boggling what that question is. Why would we be talking about this had it not been detected?
Automobile insurance
Mr. Victor Fedeli: My question is for the Minister of Finance. If there’s one certainty here at Queen’s Park, it’s that this Liberal government has broken every single promise they’ve ever made on auto insurance. In 2013, in a bid to save their minority government, they made a grandiose promise to cut rates 15% by 2015, but four years later, they’re not even halfway there because there never was a plan to get there. As the Premier famously put it, it was a “stretch goal.”
So here we are, with an election in sight. The Liberals go straight to our party’s People’s Guarantee. This is the ultimate form of flattery: the Liberals complaining about our platform on one day and copying our auto insurance plan the very next day.
Speaker, to the minister: Why did it take our People’s Guarantee to get you to finally move on auto insurance?
Hon. Charles Sousa: Wow, Mr. Speaker. It’s as if they never even read the Marshall report when they brought forward their claim in their glossy magazine. In fact, I would argue for that member to tell this House how he intends to, on the one hand, lower rates in one postal code or geography without impacting the rates in his own riding in North Bay—that is their plan. Their plan is to increase rates everywhere else in the province.
We have come out with a very comprehensive plan to—
Interjections.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): If that continues, I’ll find the individuals and warn you all.
Finish.
Hon. Charles Sousa: So I ask the member: How do you intend to reduce rates—
Mr. John Yakabuski: Try to explain your plan.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member from Renfrew–Nipissing–Pembroke is warned.
Hon. Charles Sousa: I ask the member: How do you intend to reduce rates in one geography without impacting the other, when in fact what we’ve done is taken a comprehensive approach?
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?
Mr. Victor Fedeli: Back to the minister: Let’s remember that it’s his party that makes promises and then breaks them.
Hon. Charles Sousa: Now it’s not his guarantee.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The Minister of Finance is warned. Here we go.
Mr. Victor Fedeli: Auto insurance premiums are still 55% higher than in all other Canadian jurisdictions. Four years ago, this government promised a 15% cut, but they’re only at 6.6%—not even halfway there. They have completely bungled this file. They’ve made Ontario families pay the price.
This is the fourth time—the fourth time—they’ve announced an anti-fraud office. Their record on auto insurance is embarrassing. Just as it was in 2013, this latest announcement is purely politically motivated. It’s Groundhog Day all over again.
Speaker, to the minister: Why should anyone believe you’ll really do anything on auto insurance?
Hon. Charles Sousa: They’re already backing away from their guarantee. They’re already stating that, “Oh, well, we don’t really know. We’re using your results.” And he is. Everything he’s doing is based on the work that we already are doing.
FSCO has for some time been looking at some of those changes that are necessary. Again, it’s as if he never even read the report that is enabling us to provide sustained structural, transformational change in the industry to go after fraud and scam artists—
Mr. Gilles Bisson: You’re helping the insurance companies against the accident victims—
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member from Timmins–James Bay is warned.
You may finish.
Hon. Charles Sousa: We announced today a seven-point plan to make those transformations that are going to provide sustainable reductions. To date, we have taken action. It has reduced rates—up to 10% at one point in time—and, in fact, we need to go lower. That’s why we announced what we did today to go after fraud, providing support for consumers and victims, not insurance companies and not those who are gaming the system.
Automobile insurance
Mr. Wayne Gates: Since 2013, your government committed to lowering auto insurance rates by 15%—
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Who’s the question to?
Mr. Wayne Gates: Oh, sorry. I apologize. My question is to the Acting Premier.
Since 2013, your government committed to lowering auto insurance rates by 15%, but you let the people of Ontario down. Your excuse was that it was only a “stretch goal.” Your government then tried to bury your report, which showed that even though Ontario has one of the lowest levels of collisions, we pay some of the highest rates.
Today, we heard about a new auto insurance scheme, and it doesn’t even target rate reduction. Is this another stretch goal by the Liberal government to pretend you’re lowering auto insurance rates right before an election?
Hon. Deborah Matthews: Minister of Finance.
Hon. Charles Sousa: When that member and that party had the opportunity to act on recommendations to lower those premiums, they voted against the very measures that we are introducing. They stood by—in fact, they turned their backs on Ontarians that very day. Literally, they turned their backs on them by turning themselves around when it came time to vote.
We need to stand up for Ontarians and we need to go after the structural changes, the predatory practices, the fraud, the scammers—all those that are taking advantage of people in the system. That’s exactly what we announced today. We are going to make transformational change, we’re going to fight fraud and we’re going to ensure those rates go down, sustained, over time.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you. Supplementary?
Mr. Wayne Gates: Again to the Acting Premier: Your government record on auto insurance speaks for itself. Your government promised to reduce auto insurance rates by 15% and you didn’t. Your government ignored our calls to end discriminatory insurance rates that hit low-income people the hardest. You said that you wouldn’t put insurance companies’ profits over residents, and you did.
We’ve seen this play out before. Before an election you make promises about auto insurance, and right after the election, you let people down. Why would people believe you this time?
Hon. Charles Sousa: Again, it’s as though they didn’t read David Marshall’s report, because he also states that a public auto insurance scheme would not work and would cost us even more money. That’s what they’re advocating for in the end.
What we’re doing here is providing a standard treatment plan that enables those individuals who are victims of collisions to get treatment immediately, as they should. It’s going about establishing independent, neutral examination centres that aren’t going to be held accountable to an insurance company or a legal provider. It’s going to establish a serious fraud office to go after those cases. I encourage all of you to make calls to that serious fraud office to ensure that we curb those activities.
It’s not just those who are committing fraud who are accountable here; it’s those who are accommodating those fraud cases and paying out those cases who have to be held accountable as well. We’re going after that, we’re going after contingency fees, and we have an expert panel to ensure it gets implemented by next spring.
Sexual violence and harassment
Ms. Daiene Vernile: My question is for the Minister of Labour. Minister, everyone should be able to go to work knowing that they will be safe in their workplace and confident that they can return home, safe and sound, every day. It’s important for all of us to take workplace violence, including sexual violence and harassment, very seriously.
We know that the Occupational Health and Safety Act already has requirements to help us do this, and the sexual violence and harassment action plan has strengthened those requirements. This plan has ensured that since September of last year, the Occupational Health and Safety Act includes a new definition of workplace sexual harassment, the addition of workplace harassment programs and specific new employer duties to address workplace harassment.
These measures send a very strong message that sexual violence and harassment are not acceptable in the workplace, but I believe more can be done. Could the minister please tell us what else this government is doing to address sexual violence and harassment?
Hon. Kevin Daniel Flynn: Thank you to the member from Kitchener Centre for this very important question on a very important issue. It’s a priority for this government that people are safe in their homes, in their workplaces and in their communities. That’s why we brought forward the sexual violence and harassment action plan.
In addition to the measures that were previously mentioned, the plan also established a dedicated enforcement team that responds to complaints. The inspectors on this dedicated team have conducted nearly 2,000 field visits so far, and they have issued over 3,000 orders. What we’re doing at the MOL is sending out a very clear message that sexual violence and sexual harassment in our workplaces will simply not be tolerated in the province of Ontario.
In addition to these protections, we’re also committed to providing support to those who are affected by domestic and sexual violence: 10 days’ leave, five of which are paid, 15 weeks of job-protected leave at a time when they need it the most.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?
Ms. Daiene Vernile: Speaker, I’d like to thank the minister for his very strong leadership on this. The new leave for those affected by domestic and sexual violence is one that I was incredibly proud to support for families in my riding of Kitchener Centre and around the province. I believe that workers and their families need time and support when they’re dealing with these tremendously difficult circumstances, and this leave affords them that time.
As the president of the Canadian Labour Congress, Hassan Yussuff, has said, “We know that designated, paid domestic violence leave means it is easier for survivors to keep their jobs and escape violent and abusive relationships. And sometimes, that can mean the difference between life and death.”
It is hard to comprehend how the Leader of the Opposition and his caucus could deny supporting this leave, in addition to all of the other measures in Bill 148 that will help so many people. Speaker, could the minister please share with us what other changes were made in Bill 148 to afford families the job-protected leave that they need?
Hon. Kevin Daniel Flynn: Thank you again to the member from Kitchener Centre. I’m very happy to stand in the House to speak about the support that we’re providing to Ontario’s families. Through Bill 148, we expanded a number of job-protected leaves. All employees will now be entitled to 10 personal emergency leave days, and two of those are going to be paid. A new two-year child death leave was established, child disappearance leave was doubled, family medical leave was increased up to 27 weeks and pregnancy leave was doubled—I have to thank the member from Eglinton–Lawrence for his advocacy on this. Critical illness was expanded and parental leave was increased to 18 months.
All these leaves come into effect starting January 1 of next year, with the exception of the last two, which actually came into effect last Sunday. This speaks volumes about the dedication of this government in voting against and standing opposed to these Progressive Conservative policies. The official opposition are doing exactly what we expected of them.
Government’s record
Mr. Steve Clark: My question is for the Minister of Environment and Climate Change. You know, Speaker, facts still matter.
Mr. Victor Fedeli: Not to the Liberals.
Mr. Steve Clark: Well, do you know what? Trust and accountability need to come back to this place. Yesterday, this minister would not correct a misrepresentation of the truth. Instead—
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member will withdraw.
Mr. Steve Clark: Withdrawn.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Be careful going forward.
Mr. Steve Clark: Instead, this minister made another incorrect statement. He said the PCs would cut funding to the GO regional express rail. That is factually incorrect. I would ask him to turn to the Toronto Star and read the paragraph that says the PCs would also complete the expansion of GO Transit service known as regional express rail.
It’s another factually incorrect statement from the Liberals, which is shocking. Will the minister apologize for his incorrect statement, because he is simply wrong?
Hon. Chris Ballard: Well, Speaker, what a wonderful opportunity. I thank the member opposite for that friendly question.
There’s no record to correct, Speaker. Having read the people’s choice scheme—anyone who is reading, especially if they refer to page 76, where there are $12 billion in cuts outlined—anyone can read that, Mr. Speaker. We all know that it’s there. It raises a question: Where are those cuts going to come from? Will it be cuts to OHIP+, that wonderful program that is going to provide prescription medication to those up to their 25th birthday? Is it going to be free post-secondary tuition? Are they going to roll back the $15 minimum wage? There will be $12 billion in cuts.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?
Mr. Steve Clark: Back to the minister: The Liberals’ fact-checking record is dubious at best. There is a litany of errors that come out of this Liberal research team, and it happens time and time again. When presented with the real facts, the Liberals refuse to back down.
Just look at Trevor Tombe’s
article in Maclean’s. Let’s keep in mind that this is the economist whom the Liberals cited in their short-sighted attack. It says Premier Wynne “is wrong when she claims the [PC] plan will cost families more than cap-and-trade and do less to cut emissions.” Wrong, factually incorrect, yet the government refuses to retract the statement.
Speaker, will the minister do it now? Will he retract and apologize? Facts still matter.
Hon. Chris Ballard: Speaker, I was going to pass the question about RER to the Minister of Transportation, but since the question is around cap-and-trade and climate change, I want to touch on that myself and really talk about some of the unbelievable statements that are coming from the party opposite.
Patrick Brown claims that analysis showing his carbon tax scheme, which would make everything—
Mr. John Yakabuski: Proper names.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you for the assist. I know what I’m doing.
Title; thank you.
Hon. Chris Ballard: Sorry, Speaker. The Leader of the Opposition claims that he has analysis showing his carbon tax scheme—it’s going to make everything more expensive in Ontario.
Mr. Han Dong: That’s a fact.
Hon. Chris Ballard: That’s a fact, Speaker.
Mr. Sam Oosterhoff: Wrong.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): As I promised, the member from Niagara West–Glanbrook is warned.
Finish.
Hon. Chris Ballard: The Leader of the Opposition has no real plan to reduce emissions. His slapping a carbon tax on everything is going to cost us and all Ontarians more, and do less.
Mr. Steve Clark: Wrong, wrong, wrong.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member from Leeds–Grenville is warned.
New question.
Group homes
Mrs. Lisa Gretzky: To the Acting Premier: It is unfortunate that I have to question this Liberal government for the second time in a month about the abhorrent conditions in unlicensed group homes in Ontario. Last week we learned that a 70-year-old man named Esa died trying to escape a group home in 2016, where he had been illegally locked inside a mice-infested basement.
Unlicensed homes are often a last resort for persons with disabilities, seniors and those with mental health concerns—people who have nowhere else to go. They are forced to live in homes that the OPP have discovered to be overcrowded, unsanitary and in deplorable condition.
The province has had these results from the OPP for over a year. How many people need to lose their lives in order for this Liberal government to take action on unlicensed group homes?
Hon. Deborah Matthews: To the Minister of Health.
Hon. Eric Hoskins: The member opposite—I appreciate the question. This is a critically important question as well. We all expect the providers in these types of care homes to provide the supports and a level of care which both reflects the nature of that care home and is of the highest possible standard.
Mr. Speaker, we have also worked with and relied on our municipal partners, who have that responsibility for asserting and promulgating certain bylaws and providing those guidelines, regulations and protections that are necessary.
That being said, I know that there was an incident not that long ago with regard to a care home providing care in Scarborough, which the ministry was involved in. It is an issue that I have asked the ministry to look at, as it is a cross-ministry issue, to make sure that we can address this effectively.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?
Mrs. Lisa Gretzky: To the Minister of Community and Social Services, who should actually be in charge of the portfolio: On November 1, I asked the Liberal government to take action on unlicensed group homes. In her response, the Premier said to me, “We are working on all of those fronts, as it is our obligation to do.”
It seems the Premier doesn’t truly understand this obligation. Fifteen days after I questioned the Premier, a woman fell out of bed and died in a group home in Toronto. An additional problem is, we don’t know how many vulnerable people are dying in these horrendous conditions. One man with dementia fell down the stairs at a home and was never seen again. The incident was never reported to the police.
Speaker, there doesn’t seem to be any minister in particular who is tackling this head-on. Will the Acting Premier tell us exactly what next steps this Liberal government is taking to ensure that our most vulnerable are not living and dying in deplorable conditions?
Interjections.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Be seated, please. Thank you.
Minister?
Hon. Eric Hoskins: The Minister of Community and Social Services.
Hon. Helena Jaczek: To clarify for the member opposite, the member from Windsor West, the exact responsibilities of my ministry are in relation to those with developmental disabilities and adults in that particular age group between 18 and 64. I’m very happy to talk about the strengthening of our oversight, my ministry’s oversight, in respect to these particular facilities.
First of all, our ministry contracts with agencies out in the community, some—
Interjection.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Finish.
Hon. Helena Jaczek: We contract with a number of agencies, in fact, some 360 across the province, which then contract with further agencies that supply group homes.
Interjection.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member from Hamilton Mountain is warned.
Hon. Helena Jaczek: These homes are for those with developmental disabilities, and we have legislated quality assurance measures that include criminal and vulnerable sector screening checks for all employees. We train all staff on abuse prevention and reporting requirements, and there are policies and procedures regarding the personal safety and security for all the individuals supported by the agency.
Climate change
Mrs. Cristina Martins: My question is for the Minister of Transportation. I think it goes without saying that the way we move around to get to work or school, pick up our kids and do errands has a significant impact on our environment. In 2015 alone, the transportation sector contributed to 37% of greenhouse gas emissions. It’s very clear from that statistic that something needs to be done.
I know that our government is taking a number of steps to get that percentage down. One important way we’re working to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is by investing in active, sustainable forms of transportation like cycling and walking. Yesterday morning, I was very pleased to have Minister Del Duca join me in Davenport to make an announcement about our latest investment to support cycling here in our province.
Would the minister please provide the members of this House with more information on that exciting announcement?
Hon. Steven Del Duca: I’d like to begin, of course, by thanking the member from Davenport not only for hosting us yesterday in her community but for the incredible advocacy that she does for the people of Davenport on a regular basis. As well, I would be remiss if I didn’t also take the opportunity to thank the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Sport for her unwavering advocacy on behalf of Ontario’s cycling community.
Members of this House may remember that a number of weeks ago, our government announced $42.5 million for something called the Ontario Municipal Commuter Cycling Program. Since that time, since that announcement, a lot has changed. Thanks to revenues that were generated through cap-and-trade options, we were able to more than double the amount of funding available to our municipal partners for this fiscal year. Through this program, we announced yesterday that we’ll be providing $93 million to support commuter cycling projects in 120 communities right across the province of Ontario.
Here in Toronto, this city alone will be receiving more than $25 million to support cycling infrastructure for the people of this community.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?
Mrs. Cristina Martins: It truly was a very exciting morning yesterday at Sweet Pete’s Bike Shop in Davenport. I know Toronto’s share of this funding will go a long way towards creating a safe and dependable cycling network in my community, and I can’t wait to see more people choosing to bike because of it.
Speaker, for the past few days we’ve been talking quite a bit about our government’s climate change action plan. That is because just a short time ago, the Ontario Conservatives released their People’s Guarantee. In that guarantee, they made it absolutely clear that they were making no guarantee for our environment. Instead of investing in programs to make Ontario a healthier, more sustainable province, the leader of the official opposition wants to cut the critical investments we’re making through our climate change action plan.
Speaker, through you to the minister: Would the minister please provide more information on how our government’s plan to address greenhouse gas emissions in the transportation sector differs from the plan of the party opposite?
Hon. Steven Del Duca: I thank the member from Davenport for her follow-up question. I want to be absolutely clear: Our investment of $93 million for cycling infrastructure in every corner of the province—including, I would say, in the leader of the official opposition’s own community—would, in fact, be on the chopping block if the party opposite were to come to power and followed through on what they’re proposing.
On this side of the House, we know that cutting or eliminating the climate change action plan would also mean eliminating investments for electric vehicle charging infrastructure and also cutting or reducing drastically support for important transit and transportation projects like GO regional express rail. But beyond the $6 billion that would be cut from these programs, Ontario’s Conservatives would still need to find another $6 billion worth of cuts were they to follow through on their program.
Speaker, on this side of the House, we will continue to invest in the things that matter most to the people we’re proud to represent. We’ll move the province forward, we’ll strengthen our economy, and we’ll make sure the people have the quality of life that they should be guaranteed.
Transportation infrastructure
Mr. Michael Harris: My question is to the Minister of Transportation. A week ago, the People’s Guarantee showed commuters in Ontario’s largest, most vibrant, yet gridlocked city what it would look like if a provincial government had their back in meeting their transit needs.
Commuters in Toronto are sick and tired of costly, long commutes stretching further into more time away from family. They’re sick and tired of delays and inaction on key pieces of infrastructure like the Scarborough subway, as the self-proclaimed subway-champion Liberals deliver little more than repeated promises.
Speaker, the People’s Guarantee proposes to take on the city of Toronto’s $1-billion funding portion for the Scarborough—
Hon. Mitzie Hunter: It was in the budget you voted down.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Stop the clock, please. The Minister of Education is warned.
Finish, please.
Mr. Michael Harris: Again, the People’s Guarantee proposes to take on the city of Toronto’s $1-billion funding portion for the Scarborough subway extension as well as the cost escalator that the Liberals refuse to fund so that we can get that extension built immediately.
We’ve made it clear where we stand. Will the minister tell us which side of the tracks he stands on to finally build the Scarborough subway?
Hon. Steven Del Duca: I find this question fascinating from the member from Kitchener–Conestoga, in keeping with the fascination that I had when the member from Leeds–Grenville asked my colleague just a few minutes ago to apologize for some of the statements that he’s made over the last couple of days.
Speaker, I’ve got to tell you, as a lifelong resident of the greater Toronto and Hamilton area, a proud lifelong resident who has literally watched us deal with the consequences of tragic decisions that were made by the Conservatives when they were last in power on transit, and on transportation specifically, I have to say that I want to know when they will apologize for killing and filling the Eglinton subway. I want to know when Patrick Brown and the Conservatives will apologize for first tolling and then selling the 407 to a Spanish consortium.
I want to know when that party will apologize for having a multitude of positions on the Scarborough subway, specifically the member from Scarborough–Rouge River—
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you.
Interjections.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Be seated, please. A reminder to the minister: When I stand, you sit.
Supplementary.
Mr. Michael Harris: Instead of the subway, the Wynne Liberals have played political football with the transit needs of Scarborough, kicking their hopes down the track.
Commuters right across Toronto are at the end of the line when it comes to the government’s failure to deliver. It’s time for change that works for transit users, not only for those in Scarborough but through a commitment to an additional $5 billion to build new subways right across the entire GTA. It’s time for the Wynne government to stop making excuses and get shovels in the ground to get subways built.
The relief line, the Yonge extension and the Sheppard subway extension should have all moved ahead as prime candidates for development, but, of course, they have not. While we prepare to move these vital projects forward, will the minister explain why his government has failed to provide this transit support that commuters in our GTA deserve?
Hon. Steven Del Duca: As I was saying a second ago, I am determined to try to find out when that member and his party will apologize for voting against every single Liberal budget over the last number of years that has seen fit to invest in more GO trains for Kitchener-Waterloo. I want to know when they’re going to apologize for flip-flopping repeatedly during the last campaign on the Ottawa LRT that our government is investing in.
I want to know when that party fundamentally will have the courage of its convictions and stand up and just readily admit to the people of Ontario exactly what you will cut to make your numbers add up. How will you justify page 76? Will it be hospitals? Will it be schools? Will it be subways again, and transportation projects in every corner of this province?
Just have the courage. Patrick Brown, have the courage to tell the people of Ontario—
Interjections.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Another reminder to the minister and to all members that we are respectful in this place and use titles or ridings only.
New question.
Autism treatment
Miss Monique Taylor: My question is for the Minister of Children and Youth Services. Remi Ranger is a 10-year-old boy with severe autism and other complex needs. This causes him to be very violent with himself and others. Due to a seizure he had at school, he ended up in a hospital where he spent the next 24 days. During that time, he had no treatment, because the hospital said it was related to his autism. He was discharged last Friday, and his mother was told she was on her own while she had to wait for a placement at CPRI in London, which will not come for at least another five months.
This family is in crisis and desperately needs help. Is this the service that the minister has promised families?
Hon. Michael Coteau: I want to thank the member opposite for this question. As the member knows, when it comes to autism services and to better positioning families for success, we’ve been doing everything we can on this side to put forward a new plan for Ontario, to ensure that young people have the opportunity to get the services that they need.
Mr. Speaker, I’ve committed to bringing forward a plan this year that will change autism services here in the province of Ontario. We know that all eyes are on Ontario, from across the country, as we transform this system. We’re looking to create 16,000 new spaces. This will significantly reduce wait times here in the province of Ontario. What we aim to do is to put choice, confidence and consistency back into the system to ensure that families have a choice when they are seeking those types of services.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary.
Miss Monique Taylor: I think if this mother had a choice, her son would be in the proper facility to get the treatment that he needs. This family has literally been torn apart. She has six other children who had to be moved out of the house so that she can keep those children safe.
Remi and his mother live in a space where everything has to be locked for safety. She calls it “autism jail.” Caring for Remi is around the clock, 24 hours a day. He bites and hurts himself and others. The situation is simply too much for the family to handle. What is the minister going to do to ensure that Remi and his mother get immediate help now, to take them out of this crisis that they’re in?
Interjections.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Be seated, please. Thank you.
Minister?
Hon. Michael Coteau: We’ve put forward an historic investment into autism services to create 16,000 new spots. The member opposite asked the question, “What are we going to do to help families here in the province of Ontario?” We’ve put forward a plan to allow parents to choose either direct service or they can choose to have direct funding.
The question I’d like to ask the NDP: Do they agree with the direct funding option that we’ve put forward?
Miss Monique Taylor: No, no.
Hon. Michael Coteau: They don’t. So here you go. Here we are. We say that we’re going to go forward with the direct funding, put the—
Interjection.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): If I actually knew the person that was—there might be warnings involved in this.
Minister?
Hon. Michael Coteau: Mr. Speaker, we put a plan forward that will give the family a choice that they can receive that money and actually get the services they need.
It’s clear that the NDP disagrees with a direct funding option. I think they should let parents know that they disagree with that, an option which parents have been asking for for decades in the province of Ontario.
Automobile insurance
Ms. Soo Wong: My question is to the Minister of Finance. We know that there are ongoing issues with fraud in the auto insurance industry. This past weekend, the Globe and Mail published an investigative report on the bad actors in the system. Fraud costs the system an estimated $1.6 billion annually. This is a serious issue to people in Ontario. It’s a serious issue in my riding of Scarborough–Agincourt, especially for the seniors, who have to combat high auto insurance rates as a result of the bad actors driving up the rates. I have spoken out against the auto insurance fraud issue.
Ontario has one of the lowest accident rates of any province, and I know this government has been working tirelessly to address this issue. That’s why I’m very pleased to hear that this government is establishing the serious fraud office.
Speaker, through you to the minister: Can he please provide more detail on the serious fraud office and what it will achieve?
Hon. Charles Sousa: Thank you for the question and to the member from Scarborough–Agincourt, who has been a true advocate for her constituents regarding auto insurance reform. I thank my colleagues as well: the Attorney General and the Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services.
This government has taken immediate action to combat criminal fraud with the establishment of the serious fraud office, as the member has just asked. The mandate and scope is, first and foremost, to protect the Ontario public; to limit losses suffered by victims; and to recover stolen assets.
The serious fraud office would be an integrated, multidisciplinary investigation and prosecution team dedicated to fighting major causes of fraud. This includes serious and complex cases perpetrated from insurance companies, agents, brokers and/or adjusters; legal service providers; clinics, health practitioners and other health service providers; collision and repair services, such as tow trucks, vehicle storage and repair companies.
The office will be up and running in early 2018.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary? The member from Brampton West.
Mr. Vic Dhillon: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Back to the minister: I, too, am pleased to hear of the strong stance our government is taking on fraud in the auto insurance industry.
My constituents in Brampton West will be pleased to hear this government remains committed to removing bad actors from the system. It’s unfair to those hard-working people in Ontario who are faced with mounting auto insurance rates as a result of a few bad apples taking advantage of the system.
It’s not just consumers who feel this hit; victims of auto accidents are also the ones who suffer the most. I know that David Marshall found that victims of auto accidents are often caught between insurance companies and the legal system, resulting in delays in receiving care and extended recovery times. That’s why this government is ensuring that these individuals are properly taken care of in the event of an accident.
Minister, please provide more details on how the government is improving support for victims and consumers.
Hon. Charles Sousa: Thank you again for the question and to the member from Brampton West for his strong advocacy and fight on this problem.
We are making changes: changes to the way victims receive treatment for their injuries, putting victims first and helping consumers through sustained reductions in rates.
The implementation panel will help us toward a system that focuses on the implementation of pathways of care and not cash. We’re working towards setting up a system that provides immediate treatment for those suffering from minor and common injuries, so that they get the appropriate care they need when they need it.
We’re also making sure victims are receiving neutral and highly credible assessments through independent neutral examination centres.
When bad actors take advantage of the system, these costs get passed along to honest drivers. Removing cash incentives will ultimately provide savings to the drivers and lower premiums.
I thank my colleagues for their strong advocacy and fight against this issue.
Health care
Mr. Lorne Coe: My question is for the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care.
Today is the one-year anniversary of the third reading of Bill 9,
An Act to amend the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care Act.
Speaker, Bill 9 received all-party support on December 5, 2016, marking a crucial milestone in the provision of rehabilitation services for post-stroke recovery patients 19 to 64 years of age. Yet, one year later, these post-stroke Ontario residents still cannot receive the services they need and deserve.
When will the Liberal government stop the age discrimination of post-stroke survivors 19 to 64 years of age and implement Bill 9?
Hon. Eric Hoskins: I’m pleased to say that we are implementing Bill 9, a private member’s bill that was brought forward by the member opposite and enacted into law as a result of his intervention. I am gratified and appreciative of his strong advocacy.
We are committed to ensuring that those who require physiotherapy support, including those who have suffered a stroke—we’re committed to improving access to health services that they require that will result in better outcomes. We know that individuals who have suffered a stroke face enormous challenges. That is why I believe this act—and we are implementing it to the letter—will make a difference in their lives.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?
Mr. Lorne Coe: For the past 14 years, this Liberal government has failed Ontarians when it comes to the availability of health care. Post-stroke recovery patients 19 to 64 years of age have waited a full year for the Liberal government to implement Bill 9.
Will the Minister of Health take action today and provide post-stroke rehabilitation services to Ontario residents 19 to 64 years of age?
Hon. Eric Hoskins: Again, I appreciate the fact that this act is now law. We are implementing it, as a ministry.
But I do need to remind the member that what in their platform was described as an historic investment in mental health is anything but that, because it’s an investment, a commitment over 10 years, of $1.9 billion. Using precisely the same methodology as they have, our increased investment in mental health over the past 10 years—just from my ministry alone—has been in excess of $10 billion.
Our investments are unprecedented. Our investments are historic. It reflects the commitment that all of us have here in this Legislature to mental health. I ask that member opposite—his party—to sign onto our pledge of committing more than $1.9 billion to mental health over the next 10 years.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The time for question period is over.
Deferred Votes
Construction Lien Amendment Act, 2017 / Loi de 2017 modifiant la
Loi sur le privilège dans l’industrie de la construction
Deferred vote on the motion for third reading of the following bill:
Bill 142,
An Act to amend the Construction Lien Act / Projet de loi 142, Loi modifiant la
Loi sur le privilège dans l’industrie de la construction.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Call in the members. This will be a five-minute bell.
The division bells rang from 1138 to 1143.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): All members, please take your seats.
On December 4, 2017, Mr. Naqvi moved third reading of Bill 142,
An Act to amend the Construction Lien Act.
All those in favour, please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.
Ayes
Albanese, Laura
Anderson, Granville
Arnott, Ted
Bailey, Robert
Baker, Yvan
Ballard, Chris
Berardinetti, Lorenzo
Bisson, Gilles
Bradley, James J.
Chiarelli, Bob
Cho, Raymond Sung Joon
Clark, Steve
Coe, Lorne
Colle, Mike
Coteau, Michael
Crack, Grant
Damerla, Dipika
Del Duca, Steven
Delaney, Bob
Des Rosiers, Nathalie
Dhillon, Vic
Dickson, Joe
Dong, Han
Duguid, Brad
Fedeli, Victor
Fife, Catherine
Flynn, Kevin Daniel
Forster, Cindy
Fraser, John
French, Jennifer K.
Gates, Wayne
Gélinas, France
Gretzky, Lisa
Hardeman, Ernie
Harris, Michael
Hatfield, Percy
Hillier, Randy
Hoggarth, Ann
Hoskins, Eric
Hunter, Mitzie
Jaczek, Helena
Jones, Sylvia
Kiwala, Sophie
Lalonde, Marie-France
Leal, Jeff
MacCharles, Tracy
MacLaren, Jack
MacLeod, Lisa
Malhi, Harinder
Mangat, Amrit
Martins, Cristina
Martow, Gila
Matthews, Deborah
Mauro, Bill
McDonell, Jim
McGarry, Kathryn
McMeekin, Ted
McNaughton, Monte
Milczyn, Peter Z.
Miller, Norm
Miller, Paul
Moridi, Reza
Naidoo-Harris, Indira
Naqvi, Yasir
Natyshak, Taras
Nicholls, Rick
Oosterhoff, Sam
Pettapiece, Randy
Potts, Arthur
Qaadri, Shafiq
Rinaldi, Lou
Romano, Ross
Sandals, Liz
Sattler, Peggy
Scott, Laurie
Smith, Todd
Sousa, Charles
Takhar, Harinder S.
Taylor, Monique
Thompson, Lisa M.
Vanthof, John
Vernile, Daiene
Wilson, Jim
Wong, Soo
Yakabuski, John
Yurek, Jeff
Zimmer, David
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): All those opposed, please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.
The Clerk of the Assembly (Mr. Todd Decker): The ayes are 87; the nays are 0.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): I declare the motion carried.
Be it resolved that the bill do now pass and be entitled as in the motion.
Third reading agreed to.
Safer Ontario Act, 2017 / Loi de 2017 pour plus de sécurité en Ontario
Deferred vote on the motion that the question now be put on the motion for second reading of the following bill:
Bill 175,
An Act to implement measures with respect to policing, coroners and forensic laboratories and to enact, amend or repeal certain other statutes and revoke a regulation / Projet de loi 175, Loi mettant en oeuvre des mesures concernant les services policiers, les coroners et les laboratoires médico-légaux et édictant, modifiant ou abrogeant certaines autres lois et abrogeant un règlement.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): We have a deferred vote on the motion for closure on the motion for second reading of Bill 175. Call in the members. This will be a five-minute bell.
The division bells rang from 1146 to 1147.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): On November 15, 2017, Madame Lalonde moved second reading of Bill 175,
An Act to implement measures with respect to policing, coroners and forensic laboratories and to enact, amend or repeal certain other statutes and revoke a regulation. Mr. Delaney has moved that the question be now put.
All those in favour of Mr. Delaney’s motion, please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.
Ayes
Albanese, Laura
Anderson, Granville
Baker, Yvan
Ballard, Chris
Berardinetti, Lorenzo
Bradley, James J.
Chiarelli, Bob
Colle, Mike
Coteau, Michael
Crack, Grant
Damerla, Dipika
Del Duca, Steven
Delaney, Bob
Des Rosiers, Nathalie
Dhillon, Vic
Dickson, Joe
Dong, Han
Duguid, Brad
Flynn, Kevin Daniel
Fraser, John
Hoggarth, Ann
Hoskins, Eric
Hunter, Mitzie
Jaczek, Helena
Kiwala, Sophie
Lalonde, Marie-France
Leal, Jeff
MacCharles, Tracy
MacLaren, Jack
Malhi, Harinder
Mangat, Amrit
Martins, Cristina
Matthews, Deborah
Mauro, Bill
McGarry, Kathryn
McMeekin, Ted
Milczyn, Peter Z.
Moridi, Reza
Naidoo-Harris, Indira
Naqvi, Yasir
Potts, Arthur
Qaadri, Shafiq
Rinaldi, Lou
Sandals, Liz
Sousa, Charles
Takhar, Harinder S.
Vernile, Daiene
Wong, Soo
Zimmer, David
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): All those opposed, please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.
Nays
Arnott, Ted
Bailey, Robert
Barrett, Toby
Bisson, Gilles
Cho, Raymond Sung Joon
Clark, Steve
Coe, Lorne
Fedeli, Victor
Fife, Catherine
Forster, Cindy
French, Jennifer K.
Gates, Wayne
Gélinas, France
Gretzky, Lisa
Hardeman, Ernie
Harris, Michael
Hatfield, Percy
Hillier, Randy
Jones, Sylvia
MacLeod, Lisa
Martow, Gila
McDonell, Jim
McNaughton, Monte
Miller, Norm
Miller, Paul
Natyshak, Taras
Nicholls, Rick
Oosterhoff, Sam
Pettapiece, Randy
Romano, Ross
Sattler, Peggy
Scott, Laurie
Smith, Todd
Taylor, Monique
Thompson, Lisa M.
Vanthof, John
Wilson, Jim
Yakabuski, John
Yurek, Jeff
The Clerk of the Assembly (Mr. Todd Decker): The ayes are 49; the nays are 39.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): I declare the motion carried.
Madame Lalonde has moved second reading of Bill 175,
An Act to implement measures with respect to policing, coroners and forensic laboratories and to enact, amend or repeal certain other statutes and revoke a regulation. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? I heard a no.
All those in favour, please say “aye.”
All those opposed, please say “nay.”
In my opinion, the ayes have it.
Call in the members. This will be a five-minute bell.
Interjection: Same vote?
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Same vote? I heard a no.
The division bells rang from 1150 to 1151.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): All those in favour of the motion, please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.
Ayes
Albanese, Laura
Anderson, Granville
Baker, Yvan
Ballard, Chris
Berardinetti, Lorenzo
Bradley, James J.
Chiarelli, Bob
Colle, Mike
Coteau, Michael
Crack, Grant
Damerla, Dipika
Del Duca, Steven
Delaney, Bob
Des Rosiers, Nathalie
Dhillon, Vic
Dickson, Joe
Dong, Han
Duguid, Brad
Flynn, Kevin Daniel
Fraser, John
Hoggarth, Ann
Hoskins, Eric
Hunter, Mitzie
Jaczek, Helena
Kiwala, Sophie
Lalonde, Marie-France
Leal, Jeff
MacCharles, Tracy
MacLaren, Jack
Malhi, Harinder
Mangat, Amrit
Martins, Cristina
Matthews, Deborah
Mauro, Bill
McGarry, Kathryn
McMeekin, Ted
Milczyn, Peter Z.
Moridi, Reza
Naidoo-Harris, Indira
Naqvi, Yasir
Potts, Arthur
Qaadri, Shafiq
Rinaldi, Lou
Sandals, Liz
Sousa, Charles
Takhar, Harinder S.
Vernile, Daiene
Wong, Soo
Zimmer, David
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): All those opposed, please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.
Nays
Arnott, Ted
Bailey, Robert
Barrett, Toby
Bisson, Gilles
Cho, Raymond Sung Joon
Clark, Steve
Coe, Lorne
Fedeli, Victor
Fife, Catherine
Forster, Cindy
French, Jennifer K.
Gates, Wayne
Gélinas, France
Gretzky, Lisa
Hardeman, Ernie
Harris, Michael
Hatfield, Percy
Hillier, Randy
Jones, Sylvia
MacLeod, Lisa
Martow, Gila
McDonell, Jim
McNaughton, Monte
Miller, Norm
Miller, Paul
Natyshak, Taras
Nicholls, Rick
Oosterhoff, Sam
Pettapiece, Randy
Romano, Ross
Sattler, Peggy
Scott, Laurie
Smith, Todd
Taylor, Monique
Thompson, Lisa M.
Vanthof, John
Wilson, Jim
Yakabuski, John
Yurek, Jeff
The Clerk of the Assembly (Mr. Todd Decker): The ayes are 49; the nays are 39.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): I declare the motion carried.
Second reading agreed to.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Shall the bill be ordered for third reading?
Hon. Marie-France Lalonde: I would ask that the bill be referred to the Standing Committee on Justice Policy.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): So ordered.
Visitor
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Point of order, the member from Nepean–Carleton.
Ms. Lisa MacLeod: I know introductions has long passed, but a close friend of mine, Alice McCarron, is here from Nova Scotia. We went to university together and she went on to work for Premier Hamm in Nova Scotia. I’m delighted that she is here to visit with me today.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Welcome.
There are no further deferred votes. This House stands recessed until 3 p.m. this afternoon.
The House recessed from 1154 to 1500.
Introduction of Visitors
Ms. Lisa MacLeod: On my way down to the chamber today, I ran into a group of students from the University of Toronto who are here to study public policy.
It’s really good to see you all. I want to welcome you to this chamber on behalf of all of my colleagues. I hope you learn something from us, or unlearn something from us today, whatever the case may be.
Mrs. Gila Martow: I’m pleased to welcome students and alumni from the Alpha Epsilon Pi Jewish fraternity. We have Jordan Nahum, David Burden, David Gasch, Dylan Simmons, Ben Mayer-Goodman, Sheldon Wisenberg, Yam Elhav, Baruch Weinles, Ethan Weiss and Rob Ostfield. Welcome to Queen’s Park. We’re so glad to have you here.
Mr. Raymond Sung Joon Cho: I’d like to welcome Angely Pacis and Emanuel Nacario.
Members’ Statements
Formosa Lions park nativity scene
Ms. Lisa M. Thompson: One of the greatest things about the holiday season is how people connect with their community and get to take
part in extra-special events that only happen once a year.
It has become a tradition for citizens and community members to gather at Formosa Lions park to enjoy the grand opening of a gorgeous handmade nativity scene. Last Friday, families came out and enjoyed many festivities to mark this event. People sampled traditional Christmas treats such as sweet bannock, viewed the nativity scene from a horse-drawn wagon, made festive crafts, sang Christmas carols, and the kids even had a visit from Santa himself.
Whatever the holiday people celebrate, events like these always connect people to their communities and provide an opportunity to marvel in the holiday spirit and community pride.
Congratulations to the Formosa Lions, and thank you to the generous sponsors and hard-working organizers of the Formosa nativity scene and to those across Ontario who are putting on similar events that bring people together this holiday season.
By all means, if you’re travelling along County Road 12, either in Huron county or Bruce county, make sure you take the time to go through Formosa and check out the amazing work of this local community.
Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority
Ms. Cindy Forster: I want to commend the town of Pelham’s mayor, Dave Augustyn, and town council, whose reputations have been under attack by a group of regional politicians. Throughout, Mayor Augustyn has been honest and transparent, and has displayed the very best of what we ask of our public servants.
KPMG recently released an audit clearing the town, council and mayor of any wrongdoing. Despite this, Grimsby councillor Tony Quirk, chair of the Niagara region’s audit committee, questioned the accounting expertise and said he will continue to pursue his concerns.
Mr. Quirk is also on the NPCA board, which I talk about quite often, and recently launched a verbal attack against a Superior Court judge who dismissed the conservation authority’s lawsuit against decorated military veteran Ed Smith. As the justice noted, there are many places in the world one might expect such a crackdown on free speech and criticism to happen, but not in our beloved dominion of Canada. Thus, Mr. Quirk’s attacks on Pelham are highly hypocritical. He should release the legal costs for the NPCA’s suing of a private citizen if he’s on a mission of transparency and accountability.
The people of Niagara are fed up with the petty politics embraced by the NPCA board members.
The all-party provincial public accounts committee has appointed the Auditor General. Port Colborne is now calling for a supervisor—and I will continue to work on this file and encourage other municipalities in the NPCA watershed paying millions of tax dollars to do the same, because that is how democracy works.
University of Toronto Mississauga
Mr. Harinder S. Takhar: My riding of Mississauga–Erindale is home to the University of Toronto Mississauga campus. It is a matter of great pride to have such a world-renowned post-secondary institution educating our students right in our backyard. The UTM campus has expanded over the years, thanks to investments made by the government of Ontario, the city and the community. Another important factor is the leadership and vision of the administrators and the hard work of the professors who make UTM such a desirable destination for higher learning.
On November 16, I had the privilege of attending the installation of Professor Ulrich Krull as the ninth principal of UTM. It was a well-deserved occasion to celebrate the success and contributions of Professor Krull as he took over the important and key leadership position at UTM.
I would also like to congratulate Deep Saini, the outgoing UTM principal, for his hard work and dedication. It has been a privilege to get to know him personally and work with him over the years. He is on to Australia; he is the chancellor at one of the universities in Australia right now, and I want to wish him all the best.
I have the utmost confidence that with Professor Krull’s dedication, leadership and vision, UTM will continue on its successful path. His passion for academia, research and, more importantly, for the students and the school is unrivalled. I wish him all the best going forward.
Oxford-on-Rideau Tech
Mr. Steve Clark: Last Thursday, I attended the official opening of Oxford-on-Rideau Public School’s tech education program. It was an incredible night to celebrate how a dedicated group of parents brought a leading-edge coding, computer science and robotics program to this small rural school. To see those young students so enthused about what they were doing was truly inspiring.
I wasn’t there more than a few minutes, Speaker, before student Liam Steadman invited me to sit at a computer to try my hand at coding.
Throughout the gym, small robots programmed by the students zipped about, to the amazement of parents, grandparents and special guests.
Talking to the students and teachers, you could hear how Oxford-on-Rideau Tech is doing more than teaching students to succeed in a world where coding is the new literacy. Even if a career in robotics isn’t in their future, the program is sharpening essential problem-solving and analytical reasoning skills.
The driving force behind Oxford-on-Rideau Tech is the Lekx-Toniolo family: Brent, his wife, Katie, and daughters Addyson and Taylor. Brent actually presented the idea to the Upper Canada board trustees during an accommodation review meeting in March, and despite the heartbreaking outcome of that process for their school, Brent persevered. Just nine short months later, it’s amazing how far they have come.
Oxford-on-Rideau Tech is proof that high-tech programs can be delivered in any school, regardless of size or location. It takes a dedicated group of parents and educators working together to make it happen.
Northern transportation
Mr. John Vanthof: Last week, the government announced increased bus services for the north through ONTC. While we appreciate that they are loosening the chokehold a little bit on the ONTC, this certainly isn’t the enhanced bus service that we were promised when this government killed our passenger rail. Since that killing of the passenger rail, we’ve seen bus stations close and seniors having to wait in mall parking lots for the bus, and that is not changing with this announcement.
That’s why we, the NDP, under Andrea Horwath—one of our priorities is to bring passenger rail back to the north and have passenger rail work with the bus service to actually provide a coordinated passenger transportation system. How we are going to do that is that we’re going to talk to the people who use that system, talk to northerners, and give northerners the tools so they can make the decisions to make a system that is not only going to benefit the north but is going to benefit the whole province, because the north is one of the engines of this province. That’s why it’s so crucial that we have equitable service along with our neighbours and our co-Ontarians to the south.
This might be my last time to speak in the House before Christmas, so I would like to wish my friends at home and my friends here a very merry Christmas.
Lakeridge Health
Mr. Granville Anderson: Today we commemorate the first anniversary of the new Lakeridge Health, which includes the Bowmanville and Port Perry hospitals.
On December 1, 2016, Lakeridge Health, a five-hospital health system, was created to serve residents across Durham region. Lakeridge Health is comprised of five community hospitals—located in Ajax, Bowmanville, Oshawa, Port Perry and Whitby—and 16 community locations across Durham region. With a talented team of more than 5,000 dedicated doctors, nurses and health care workers, and more than 1,500 volunteers, Lakeridge Health cares for more than 1,600 people each and every day.
Lakeridge Health has evolved into a regional system to offer better access to care, to provide better, more coordinated care close to home. Lakeridge Health and its health care partners provide safe, high-quality care to people across the Durham region.
I congratulate everyone at Lakeridge Health for their dedication and commitment to the delivery of safe, quality care for the people they collectively serve.
This is a historic day, Mr. Speaker, and one that I’m very proud of. I was there when we made the decision to have the Lakeridge Health system.
Cole Pearn
Mr. Monte McNaughton: It gives me great pleasure to inform the House and all of Ontario that for the first time in history, a Canadian crew chief has won the NASCAR Cup Series championship.
Cole Pearn, from Mount Brydges, and his Furniture Row Racing team clinched the title at the Homestead-Miami Speedway on November 19, after winning seven other races during the 2017 season.
Cole began his racing career at Delaware Speedway when he was only six years old. As a driver, he was a three-time Canadian national kart-racing champion and raced in the CASCAR Super Series. He eventually made the move to the US and used his University of Waterloo education to transition from being a driver to working on racing crews as an engineer. He became crew chief for the Furniture Row team in 2015, a leadership role that really shows how respected and trusted Cole is in the sport.
Their Cup Series victory came after a year marked by professional victories and personal tragedies for Cole and his racing team. Long pegged as underdogs, their success this season is a testament to their skill, talent and perseverance.
I want to congratulate Cole Pearn and his team on their incredible victory, especially in the face of long odds and personal trials.
I also want to thank Cole for bringing a new level of excitement and pride to the Canadian racing community and especially to Lambton–Kent–Middlesex.
Abrigo Centre
Mrs. Cristina Martins: I rise today to inform the House of the completion of a critical project in my riding of Davenport.
Last Thursday, I was at the Abrigo Centre to announce and open the construction of a new elevator, to allow seniors and other people with mobility issues to access more of the fantastic programming that the Abrigo Centre offers.
I have been privileged to represent Davenport, because organizations that are as great as Abrigo are few and far between in this province, and few have been serving their communities for so long. For over 25 years, the doors of the Abrigo Centre have been open, to selflessly serve our neighbours and to make Davenport the best community it can be.
But there was one thing that stood in the way of it serving even more community members, and that was the lack of an elevator. Every time I visited Abrigo, the seniors would always tell me of their need to have an elevator.
That’s why, when I announced that the Abrigo Centre would be receiving $136,000 from the Ontario Trillium Foundation for this project last February, I was very excited. I knew that this project would be one that made lives better for seniors in Davenport. I knew because the Abrigo Centre has already empowered our seniors’ community to lead active and engaged lives. This elevator ensures that more seniors can participate in the Abrigo Centre’s programming.
I also want to thank LIUNA Local 183 for their generous donation to ensure that this project had the needed funding. LIUNA has always been an organization that gives back to the community, and this project truly could not have been possible without their support.
Projects like this often make the most difference in our communities, and I’m glad to report the completion of this elevator to the House.
International Centre for Human Rights
Mrs. Gila Martow: I’m very pleased to talk about the gala I was at this past Sunday, December 3, for the International Centre for Human Rights’ annual awards ceremony. It’s an independent, non-governmental organization. Their objective is to develop the means and methodology for establishing democracy and human rights protections. The president is Dr. Bouzari and the director is Mr. Ardeshir Zarezadeh.
Dr. Kamelia Mirdamadi, a really, really bright young woman, was the emcee. The Minister of Research, Innovation and Science was there. Ari Moghimi, who is one of my volunteers, taught me to greet everybody with “Dorood bar shoma,” which is “Greetings to all” in Farsi. They celebrated Professor Payam Akhavan, who is from the Baha’i. The human rights award went to MP James Bezan. Tony Clement was there to speak as well.
Shuvaloy Majumdar from the Macdonald-Laurier Institute said, “Real leadership means doing what we say, and ensuring what we say is heard in the deepest recesses of the darkest prisons. It means allying with those who dare to confront the terror of Hezbollah and Hamas. It means acting, and acting now, on behalf of the voiceless, whose hope hinges on our capacity for moral clarity, and not the cowardice of moral equivalence.”
I was very proud to be there to represent Thornhill. I was happy to see Councillor James Pasternak from Toronto city council there as well. And I was glad to speak on behalf of the Yazidis and other persecuted minorities.
Reports by Committees
Standing Committee on Government Agencies
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): I beg to inform the House that today the Clerk received a report on intended appointments dated December 5, 2017, of the Standing Committee on Government Agencies. Pursuant to standing order 108(f)(9), the report is deemed to be adopted by the House.
Report deemed adopted.
Introduction of Bills
Filipino Heritage Month Act, 2017 / Loi de 2017 sur le Mois du patrimoine philippin
Mr. Cho moved first reading of the following bill:
Bill 185,
An Act to proclaim the month of June as Filipino Heritage Month / Projet de loi 185, Loi proclamant le mois de juin Mois du patrimoine philippin.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.
First reading agreed to.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member for a short statement.
Mr. Raymond Sung Joon Cho: The month of June in each year is to be proclaimed as Filipino Heritage Month.
I invite a member from each of the Liberal Party and New Democratic Party to join me in co-sponsoring this bill that highlights the contributions of Filipino Canadians.
Poet Laureate of Ontario Act (In Memory of Gord Downie), 2017 / Loi de 2017 sur le poète officiel de l’Ontario (à la mémoire de Gord Downie)
Mr. Hatfield moved first reading of the following bill:
Bill 186,
An Act to establish the Poet Laureate of Ontario in memory of Gord Downie / Projet de loi 186, Loi visant à créer la charge de poète officiel de l’Ontario à la mémoire de Gord Downie.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? Carried.
First reading agreed to.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member for a short statement.
Mr. Percy Hatfield: The qualifications and selection process for the Poet Laureate are set out. The responsibilities of the Poet Laureate include promoting art and literacy, celebrating Ontario and its people, and raising the profile of Ontario poets.
Our country celebrated with the Tragically Hip, knowing it was Gord Downie’s final tour. He was a poet, a writer, a singer and an advocate for indigenous issues. It is fitting that we remember him by creating the position of Ontario’s Poet Laureate in his memory.
Motions
Consideration of Bill 160
Hon. Michael Coteau: Mr. Speaker, I believe you’ll find that we have unanimous consent to move a motion without notice regarding Bill 160,
An Act to amend, repeal and enact various Acts in the interest of strengthening quality and accountability for patients.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The minister is seeking unanimous consent to put forward a motion without notice. Do we agree? Agreed.
Minister?
Hon. Michael Coteau: I move that the Standing Committee on General Government be authorized to meet beyond its normal hour of adjournment on Wednesday, December 6, 2017, for the purpose of clause-by-clause consideration of Bill 160,
An Act to amend, repeal and enact various Acts in the interest of strengthening quality and accountability for patients; and
That, notwithstanding standing order 8(a), on Thursday, December 7, 2017, following prayers, the House shall proceed to the routine proceeding “reports by committees,” following which the House shall revert to orders of the day; and
That, notwithstanding standing order 79(b), the order for third reading of Bill 160 may be called prior to the bill being reprinted.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The minister moves that the Standing Committee on General Government—
Mr. Gilles Bisson: Dispense.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Dispense? Dispense.
Do we agree? Carried.
Motion agreed to.
Statements by the Ministry and Responses
International Volunteer Day
Hon. Laura Albanese: I rise to recognize International Volunteer Day. Designated in 1985 by the United Nations General Assembly, International Volunteer Day highlights the positive impact volunteers make locally, nationally and internationally.
Ever year on December 5, Ontario joins the world in recognizing our remarkable volunteers.
Over the past few years, we have witnessed on a grand scale the profound difference volunteers can make. From helping to make the 2015 Pan Am/Parapan Am Games and the 2017 Invictus Games a great success and embracing the large cohort of Syrian refugees arriving in Ontario to supporting Ontario150 events across the province this past year, we’ve seen that volunteers make great things happen.
Yet most often, volunteer efforts are not associated with high-profile signature events. Instead, they involve everyday, ordinary kindnesses shown to those in need by those who care. Most often, those caring volunteers seek no formal recognition at all.
Mr. Speaker, as Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, with a mandate that includes promoting volunteerism in Ontario, I am truly humbled by the large number of people in this province who regularly put the needs of others before their own.
Volunteers are key to sustaining healthy, welcoming and inclusive communities. They have helped to build Ontario into the strong and caring province it is today. Without them, our quality of life simply would not be the same.
Consider that half of all not-for-profit organizations in Ontario are run almost entirely by volunteers. Without volunteers, these organizations couldn’t function, and so many people would be without the important supports they offer and connections to the broader community they create.
Ontario has a long and proud tradition of volunteering, a tradition firmly rooted in civic responsibility. Every year, 4.9 million people in Ontario generously donate their time and talents to a wide variety of worthy causes. They lend a hand wherever it’s needed. Whether raising awareness or funds, organizing food drives or neighbourhood events, coaching kids or comforting the sick, volunteers do it all. They are often the unsung heroes, quietly working in the background, sometimes taking on difficult tasks for a greater good.
While everyone has their own reason for volunteering, I am confident that most volunteers would agree that part of the reason is simply to give back to their community, which in itself can bring tremendous satisfaction.
Mr. Speaker, volunteering benefits each one of us. It improves countless lives, strengthens communities and also enriches the volunteer, who can learn new skills and meet new people while making a very real difference in the lives of others.
The government of Ontario understands the important role volunteers play in making our province the special place that it is. That is why we support initiatives aimed at strengthening the volunteer experience. In 2015, the Ministry of Citizenship and Immigration introduced the province’s first Ontario’s Volunteer Action Plan in order to strengthen our volunteer base. As part of this action plan, this past June we hosted a volunteerism summit that brought together experts from the not-for-profit, corporate, government and academic sectors to share best practices.
Our ministry also supported the establishment of the Spark Ontario website, which allows visitors to learn about volunteering opportunities in their communities.
Knowing that our youth represent the volunteers of tomorrow, since 2008 we have partnered with the Ontario Volunteer Centre Network and volunteer centres across the province to deliver the ChangeTheWorld–Ontario Youth Volunteer Challenge. Aimed at increasing the number of high school students volunteering across Ontario, the 2017 campaign saw more than 68,000 young volunteers contributing more than 331,000 hours in their communities.
Mr. Speaker, it is important to recognize Ontario’s generous volunteers. Our government and our ministry offer a number of programs that celebrate volunteers of every age. These programs include the Ontario Medal for Young Volunteers, which honours outstanding commitment to volunteering by Ontarians between the ages of 15 and 24; the Ontario Medal for Good Citizenship, Ontario’s second-highest honour, which recognizes exceptional efforts and long-term commitments to communities; and the Ontario Senior Achievement Awards, which recognize outstanding seniors who have made incredible contributions to their communities.
Every spring, during National Volunteer Week, the June Callwood Outstanding Achievement Awards for Voluntarism are presented, recognizing exceptional contributions to volunteering and community service. At the 2017 June Callwood awards ceremony, we introduced a new “excellence in volunteer management” category to recognize the important role that volunteer managers play.
Lastly, every year, Ontario Volunteer Service Awards ceremonies are hosted across the province to recognize thousands of volunteers for their continuous service to their communities.
Mr. Speaker, on International Volunteer Day, I encourage everybody to take a moment and thank a volunteer. Volunteers make our world a better place.
The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): It is time for responses.
Ms. Sylvia Jones: I’m pleased—actually, I’m very pleased—to rise on behalf of my leader, Patrick Brown, and the Ontario PC caucus to recognize International Volunteer Day.
Speaker, I’m sure you are no different than all the rest of the MPPs in Ontario. We have many opportunities to travel around our communities and meet literally hundreds of volunteers who work every day, tirelessly, to make our communities better. Volunteers are our communities at their very best. To paraphrase former Governor General David Johnston, they are giving their time, their talent and their treasures, and volunteer efforts bring our communities together.
Just this past weekend, I was at the Santa Claus parade in Bolton, which is run by the Bolton Kinsmen, all volunteers. Many other Santa Claus parades and great community events are organized by volunteers, like Christmas in the Park, organized by the Optimist Club of Orangeville, and the Shelburne Santa Claus parade, by the BIA.
Whether it is the many volunteers this summer at the Special Olympics Ontario games in Peel or the volunteers at the Orangeville Blues and Jazz Festival, many of the events our communities care about simply would not happen without the dedication and commitment of our volunteers.
When volunteers take the time to contribute to their community, they are more likely to find another cause to support. According to Statistics Canada, in 2010, 10% of volunteers accounted for 53% of all volunteer hours given to non-profit and charitable organizations. That means they dedicate more than 390 hours to their volunteer work, or the equivalent of 10 weeks of full-time work. It’s no exaggeration to say that these dedicated volunteers are what make Ontario a great place to live and raise a family.
Organizations like Volunteer MBC, which is Mississauga, Brampton and Caledon, or Vo