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

July 26, 2018

42nd Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcript 2018-Jul-26 (PDF)

L010 - Thu 26 Jul 2018 / Jeu 26 jui 2018

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Thursday 26 July 2018 Jeudi 26 juillet 2018

Royal assent / Sanction royale

Notices of reasoned amendments

Orders of the Day

Government policies

Introduction of Visitors

Oral Questions

Mental health services

Government policies

Addiction services

Taxation

Curriculum

Immigrant and refugee services

School facilities

Taxation

Affordable housing

Immigrant and refugee services

Affordable housing

Economic development

Automotive industry

Retirement homes

Hospital funding

Government contracts

Government’s agenda

Greenhouse gas emissions

Introduction of Visitors

Members’ Statements

Incident in Spadina–Fort York

Circonscription de Glengarry–Prescott–Russell

Riding of Thunder Bay–Atikokan

Events in Aurora–Oak Ridges–Richmond Hill

Regent Park

The Common Table Free Farmers Market

Cambridge Scottish Festival

Fort Erie Race Track

Hockey for Humanity Khalsa Cup

Barry Rutledge

Notice of dissatisfaction

Motions

Committee membership

Petitions

Indigenous affairs

Anti-smoking initiatives for youth

GO Transit

Employment standards

Public transit

Private Members’ Public Business

Skilled trades

Immigrant and refugee services

Compassionate Care Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur les soins de compassion

Skilled trades

Immigrant and refugee services

Compassionate Care Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur les soins de compassion

Immigrant and refugee services

The House met at 0900.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Let us pause for a moment of silence for inner thought and personal reflection.

Prayers.

Royal assent / Sanction royale

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I beg to inform the House that in the name of Her Majesty the Queen, Her Honour the Administrator has been pleased to assent to a certain bill in her office.

The Clerk-at-the-Table (Ms. Valerie Quioc Lim): The following is the title of the bill to which Her Honour did assent:

An Act respecting Hydro One Limited, the termination of the White Pines Wind Project and the labour disputes between York University and Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 3903 / Loi concernant Hydro One Limited, l’annulation du projet de parc éolien White Pines et les conflits de travail entre l’Université York et la

section locale 3903 du Syndicat canadien de la fonction publique.

Notices of reasoned amendments

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I beg to inform the House that, pursuant to standing order 71(b), both the member for Ottawa–Vanier and the member for Toronto–Danforth have notified the Clerk of their intention to file notice of a reasoned amendment to the motion for second reading of Bill 4,

An Act respecting the preparation of a climate change plan, providing for the wind down of the cap and trade program and repealing the Climate Change Mitigation and Low-carbon Economy Act, 2016. The order for second reading of Bill 4 may therefore not be called today.

Orders of the Day

Government policies

Resuming the debate adjourned on July 24, 2018, on the motion regarding government priorities.

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

Mr. Aris Babikian: Good morning, Mr. Speaker. I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate you on your election as Speaker. I am confident that your experience and skills make you the ideal individual for the position, and you will do us proud by guiding the Legislature over the next four years.

I would like also to congratulate my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for the great privilege that the people have entrusted in them and for being part of the class of 2018.

Mr. Speaker, I am humbled to stand here today to address this august chamber as the first Canadian Armenian to serve not only in the Ontario Legislature but also in any other provincial Legislature in this wonderful country of ours. Who would have thought that on the 40th anniversary of my arrival to Canada as a refugee, I would be bestowed the distinct honour of serving the crown and the people of Ontario?

I owe this privilege to the people of Scarborough–Agincourt, my volunteers, my community, my friends and, finally, my family.

Scarborough–Agincourt has been my home since 1991. My two nieces, Gacia, which means “cinnamon” in Armenian, and Meghri, which means “honey” in Armenian, were both born there. I’m a founding member of the Wishing Well community association and served on its board for two terms. I was also one of the founding members of the Willowdale legal aid clinic and served on its board for one term.

Scarborough–Agincourt is one of the most diverse ridings in Ontario. Many ethnic communities call the riding home. Amongst them are the Chinese, Greek, Tamil, Filipino, Armenian, Italian, South Asian, Hispanic, Lebanese, Coptic, Middle Eastern, East European, Afro-Canadian and many more. They all help enrich the riding’s social fabric and its multicultural nature, making it an ideal place to live and work.

We are proud to be the home of Vimy Oaks Farm. Leslie Miller, who fought in the Battle of Vimy Ridge, gathered a handful of acorns from the battlefield and planted them in his farmland in Scarborough. It is now home to the Scarborough Chinese Baptist Church on Kennedy Road. He called his farm Vimy Oaks Farm. Today, several of the original oaks still survive. However, the oaks at Vimy Ridge in France have not survived. The Vimy Foundation, in partnership with the Vimy Oaks Legacy Corp., is working to repatriate those Vimy oaks of Scarborough–Agincourt back to Vimy, to help preserve Canada’s First World War legacy through the creation of a living memorial.

Additionally, the Scarborough Hospital, Birchmount site, formerly Grace Hospital, is located in our riding. I am sure that under the leadership of Premier Doug Ford, the riding will become home of the Bridletowne community health hub, where it will host the biggest dialysis centre in Ontario.

After 31 years of Liberal reign in Scarborough–Agincourt, our riding’s residents decided that it is time for change. They resolutely believe in Ford Nation’s message of revising the sex education curriculum, extending the Sheppard subway line to Scarborough Town Centre, ending the hallway health care debacle, reducing skyrocketing hydro rates, restoring the public’s trust in government, and bringing accountability and fiscal responsibility to Queen’s Park. I’m overwhelmed by their confidence and trust in Premier Ford, the PC Party and me. Over 50% of our residents voted for me.

I would like to thank the hundreds of volunteers who also believed in our mission. Our 21-month journey culminated with the June 7 victory. I would like to make special mention of the youths who were the core of my volunteers. I would also like to pay special mention to two 12-year-olds who were the heart and soul of the campaign. I would like to mention Aris Movsessian, who is here with us today in the gallery with his mother, and Garen Demerjian. Both of them were amazing. They were at the campaign office every day. They have a bright future ahead of them.

My gratitude also goes to my sister, Sevan Hajinian, who was my campaign manager, to my mother and to the rest of my family.

Without the hard work, commitment and sacrifices of the volunteers and my family, I would not be standing here among my esteemed colleagues of this House.

The biggest influence on my life and my lifelong dedication to helping others was my grandfather. My grandfather was a survivor of the 1915 Armenian genocide. He was six years old when he witnessed the brutal killing of his six brothers and sisters, in addition to his father and 40 members of his extended family. When I was a kid, I used to listen to the horrific trauma that he lived through. I would see the sadness in his eyes.

He always encouraged me to help others, to defend the vulnerable and the persecuted members of not only my society but also anywhere they lived. He was so proud of me. I was his first grandchild. Unfortunately, he did not live to witness this day.

By the way, close to 100 years ago Ontario became a pioneer in welcoming refugees when the province brought over 120 orphaned children between the ages of eight and 10 to Ontario. They purchased a farm in Georgetown and gave a new lease on life to these survivors of the Armenian genocide. We should be proud of our history of welcoming refugees.

Since my arrival to Canada in 1978, I have been actively involved in the Canadian civil society and the multicultural communities. My contribution included political, social, neighbourhood, multi-faith, human rights, social services, education, immigration, culture and other spheres. I have served as a citizenship judge, World Vision Canada Multicultural Council ambassador, chair of Levant Settlement Centre, secretary of the Canadian Ethnocultural Council and member of the National Ethnic Press and Media Council of Canada.

As a citizenship judge, I have lectured on human rights, civic participation, tolerance, Canadian values and traditions. I am grateful to my friend the Honourable Jason Kenney, the former Minister of Immigration and Citizenship, for providing me the unique opportunity to serve the people of Canada as a citizenship judge for six years.

I have a strong regard to our youth; they are our future. I have been a Wolf Cub and Boy Scouts leader, soccer coach and youth adviser. Many of the young people that I have mentored have become leaders in their communities and organizations, and successful members of our civil society.

As a secretary of the Canadian Ethnocultural Council, I established excellent relationships with the leaders of our diverse social mosaic, participating in the national umbrella organization’s round table on the United Nations Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, consulting with high-level federal officials and ministers regarding changes in the Canadian immigration and citizenship act, testifying at the House of Commons Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration hearings regarding the Syrian refugee program.

I also testified at the House of Commons Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage and the CRTC. I was also the founding member of the Darfur Solidarity Coalition.

These are some of the highlights of my recent public service activities.

I also acted as a monitor on behalf of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe council during the 2003 parliamentary elections in Armenia. Serving as the president of the Armenian National Federation of Canada and the first executive director of the government relations office of the Armenian National Committee of Canada were additional milestones in my public calling.

Together with friends, we participated in the private sponsorship and settling of over 250 Syrian refugee families. The refugees have become productive members of our community. Many are self-employed and have bought houses. Some even contributed to the recent Progressive Conservative Party victory in Scarborough–Agincourt.

Volunteerism, especially encouraging our youth to volunteer and get involved, has always been a priority of mine. So is the conviction that the sky is the limit for any Canadian who is willing to put in the time and make the effort. Regardless of one’s colour, religion, race, name or ethnicity, Canada offers equal opportunity for all of us.

In recognition of my contributions to our country, the Canadian government awarded me the Queen Elizabeth II Golden and Diamond Jubilee medals and Canada’s 125th Confederation Commemorative Medal, while Ontario honoured me with its 20-year Volunteer Service Award.

I will be forever grateful to Canada, to Ontario and to Canadians for providing a safe haven to me and to my family and for offering me the opportunity to fulfill my potential. My contribution over the last 40 years is a small token of appreciation to the country which gave me and my family so much.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Further debate? I recognize the member from Waterloo.

Ms. Catherine Fife: Good morning. It’s a pleasure to see you in the chair, Madam Speaker, and it’s always a pleasure to stand in my place in this House and bring the concerns and the voices of the people of Waterloo to the Ontario Legislature.

I have to tell you that there is a growing sense of concern in my riding about the speed and the rashness of this government and how they have moved to, obviously, address cap-and-trade—but not the real issues of cap-and-trade, and not the real issues of climate change, but just wiping the desk off, sending those concerns right to the floor without giving any consideration as to the impact of ending cap-and-trade in the province of Ontario.

There’s a lot of conflating of language around this issue, and I feel like it’s done in an intentional way. There’s talk of “killing the carbon tax.”

The people of Waterloo are informed on such a level—we have two universities—and the environment and climate change are issues top of mind for the residents in my riding. Scrapping cap-and-trade without having a plan in place to address global warming is downright irresponsible in this age. In 2018, we should know better in this province and in this country.

Ironically, the fisticuffs that the provincial government has now engaged in with the federal government—the federal government will be well positioned, actually, to impose a carbon tax on this province, a carbon tax that we will not have a say in, on how it is implemented, how it is designed. This will happen in this province.

The government has said that they will set aside $30 million for court costs. This is an astounding admission that the province is not on a solid footing with regard to the cancelling of cap-and-trade. By taking such an aggressive action—not a micro-aggressive action; this is an aggressive action—without measuring the consequences, without being open and transparent to the people of this province as to the economic impact that cancelling cap-and-trade will have in Ontario, this destabilizes how people feel.

Certainly, in our economy, we are hearing from small businesses that will be negatively impacted by the cancelling of cap-and-trade and 758 green energy projects. Cambridge is one example. There has been a hydroelectric project ongoing for 10 years. I’m the first one to admit that we have tried to address the slowness of some of these projects. Ten years, I’m sure we can all agree, is a very long time to do an environmental assessment and to design an EA. The cost of that EA was $338,000. The municipality was invested, the Grand River Conservation Authority—a conservation authority, that, if I may say, has been starved for money for the last 15 years under the former Liberal government.

The five-year project that was going to go on in Cambridge doesn’t fall into one of those drastically poorly designed projects, but it is being treated as one by this government. Some 600 residents in the Cambridge area, at the completion of this project, would have clean, renewable, cheap energy. Between 50 and 75 jobs were going to be created when you factor in the overall effect. Cambridge is a community that, quite honestly, was trying to find some solutions through the creation of this project.

And all of the revenue that was going to be generated, ironically, through the hydroelectric generation was going to go back into the conservation authority to address the flood plain issue, the flooding issue, the lack of infrastructure in the dams that go all the way through the Grand River—the streamline. So this was a good project, and it was just about to start.

When you consider the investment that had already been made in this project—and then the government completely puts on the brakes. The board has expressed their disappointment. I’m sure the member from Cambridge will be hearing from businesses that had already invested time and energy and the technology to be part of a solution around creating clean energy, Madam Speaker.

That’s not the first project that you’ll hear about. I know that we all have projects in our respective ridings which will be negatively impacted by the manner in which cap-and-trade was cancelled in this province.

The motion that we’re debating this morning reads as follows: “That, in the opinion of this House, the current government is a government for the people.” I have to tell you, if you have to state that you’re a government for the people, I think that you’re already expressing a sentiment which is overstating the fact. It’s actually also implying that no other government in the history of this province has been a government for the people.

I looked at the picture when the Premier got sworn in here. Premiers Davis and Peterson, Bob Rae and a long line of Premiers—basically, the Premier was saying, “I’m the best Premier.” I have to tell you, if you have to say that you’re the best, then I think that we all know that you’re really communicating a position of weakness.

This motion goes on to say that you have a “clear mandate to pursue policies that put more money in people’s pockets.” I do want to remind the government that because of our electoral system, this government, the PC government of the day, received only 40% of the votes in Ontario. Sixty per cent of the people in this province did not vote for this concept of an extra dollar in your pocket; 60% of the people in this province would really like to see that extra dollar invested in long-term care, for instance.

There is a crisis in long-term care. The former Liberal government—and I know that it’s hard not to talk about it—but it’s a pretty impressive record of not doing the right thing for the people of the province. Perhaps we can agree on this. The Liberal government ceded their entire responsibility for long-term care to the private sector—almost entirely. They basically said, “We’re going to try to maintain this mirage of caring for the public in a public universal health care system,” which they were slowly undermining through privatization. “But when people get to a certain age, we’re going to leave that to the corporations.”

In this province, the not-for-profit long-term-care homes do really good work. I want to commend them for the work that they do, because they have not seen the kind of funding that they need to actually care for our seniors in an appropriate and a compassionate way. In fact, we have brought forward a motion that tried to hold the government to account, to at least give a senior in this province—who contributed to our economy, who contributed to our community—and, yes, they should get at least four hours of hands-on care each day, meaning feeding, nutrition, bathing and basic hygiene.

I mean, is this too much to ask? But the government refused to engage in that. Quite honestly, we have not heard anything; the PC government has been silent on the quality of long-term care.

You have said that you’re going to build beds. Well, I can tell you that building a long-term-care bed requires people. At the same time as we’ve been engaging in this conversation about building beds, the government has put the brakes on new hires, so through attrition, we’re actually losing the very people who are responsible for the caring and the managing of those systems of care.

This motion goes on to say that this government is going to try to create—it’s actually in the motion, that the government for the people is going to “create and protect jobs.” And yet we heard yesterday, loud and clear, from businesses from across the province, an open letter to this government saying the manner in which you have cancelled the green energy projects carte blanche—because there are some good ones in there. There are some that have been of concern, but you just decided to wipe the desk clean again. This undermines confidence in our economy.

For investors who are looking to Ontario to start new businesses, to invest in the businesses that are here, the instability with which this government has made decisions causes those investors to back away.

And, quite honestly, you can’t blame them, especially when you come back with bumper-sticker slogans like “We are going to reduce hydro by 12 cents.” If you are taking one action where you are actually going to be increasing the cost of hydro by reducing renewable energy in the province of Ontario, you can’t on the other hand say that you’re magically going to reduce the cost of hydro, especially because you have doubled down on the Liberal plan that the Financial Accountability Officer has stated is unfair to the people of this province because you are pushing billions of dollars of debt to future generations, which you railed against when you sat on this side of the House.

You railed against that Liberal plan, and now you have doubled down and endorsed it, and then you threw a little gasoline on the whole mess by cancelling the 758 green energy projects.

This is a government that is practising walking in full contradiction of the rhetoric and the action. It’s going to be a full-time job for us on this side of the House, Madam Speaker, to hold this government to account, because they’re throwing it at us so quickly that it’s hard for us to do our due diligence and bring those voices of our respective ridings and concerns to this place.

But I can tell you that the people of Waterloo region right now are feeling very concerned but also are really looking to the two NDP members and saying, “Can you explain why this government is acting the way that it is when it knows that it is compromising confidence in our economy, when it is signalling to investors across Canada, even our other provinces, and is doing this intentionally?” and all under the auspices of greater financial accountability, in fact, even though we have, really, over a decade’s worth of Auditor General reports which have highlighted the systemic weaknesses that the Liberals built into the culture of this place, and even though we have a Financial Accountability Officer who has reviewed the finances, the accounting treatments, the unfair hydro plan, and you have the evidence right in front of you.

This is the thing with governments: Responsible governments have a responsibility to use the data and the evidence that is before them to establish policy. This is not a “stretch goal.” This is the job that we have as legislators, to responsibly act with knowledge.

Now, the government may not like what the Auditor General has reported with regard to the accounting treatment. The government may not agree entirely with the Financial Accountability Officer, a budgetary officer that we fought to get into this place during the minority government. In fact, I was in on the original hiring policy for that office.

The goal of the FAO is to review expenditures but also to look to the future, to examine future projects and to say, you know, “This is not necessarily going to work out as the government of the day plans.” Now, I am telling you right now, the Financial Accountability Officer had lots of fodder and lots of material with the former Liberal government. But now, this government has decided to hire another level, even though they have evidence before them.

I was reading David Parkinson from the Globe and Mail last week. This actually came out exactly a week ago. He starts off the

article by saying: “It’s ironic that a Premier elected on a pledge of leaner, more cost-effective government would kick off that quest with such a glaring waste of time and money.”

It goes on to say that the Auditor General and the FAO have already issued official opinions that the previous government’s budget has not properly accounted for a couple of key items, so you already have this information before you in those reports. He points out what is very glaring to us on this side of the House: that it’s hard not to feel that “this is less a serious investigation than a smoke-screen.”

I just want to let you know that we understand what you’re trying to do. We understand that you’re going to get a tool by this review, and then you’re going to start cutting; right? This is without due process. We have a responsibility on this side of the House to ensure that the public services that you have said that you care about—that we have the chance in this Legislature to protect those services and to bring those concerns of our respective citizens in our ridings to this place.

This is all happening within the context of the fact that the Premier did not have a platform, so there was no costing out. There were slogans like “buck-a-beer.” I’m telling you right now that if you move ahead with reversing the sex ed curriculum, with cancelling cap-and-trade and, therefore, imposing a carbon tax on this province from the federal level, with cancelling the 758 green energy projects—most of them are in process or almost completed. The White Pines wind farm was erecting one of those windmills yesterday as we were debating this issue.

Decommissioning that project and spending almost the next four years entirely hiring lawyers in the judicial system and fighting contract law in this province is not in the best interests of the people of this province.

It really is hard to summarize entirely the level of discontent already that people are feeling with regard to this government. I feel like they are not buying what you are selling, and they very soon will see the impact of poor decisions that this government has made on a whole number of fronts.

I think that if you have to put in a motion, as they have right here, that you need to trust the government, that this is your goal, your actions do exactly the opposite. Compromising our economy by disregarding the interests of business and investors who are currently in this province does not build economic confidence. Cancelling and reversing the sex ed curriculum—not even keeping it in place while you consult—puts children in our province at risk. This cannot be disputed.

We are ultimately talking about values. We will continue to hold this government to account, to watch very carefully what they are saying on this side and what they are doing on this side, because right now, this is a government walking in full contradiction of every value that PCs or Conservatives hold up in this province.

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

Mr. Stephen Lecce: I want to just note, Madam Speaker, I’ll be sharing my time with the member from Thornhill.

I want to, first off, if I may for a second, just say I was very moved to see and stand with New Democrats and members of all parties yesterday at the Danforth vigil. I think it’s an important symbol to the city that we stand united at a time of difficulty. So it was good to see many of you.

If I may, Madam Speaker, I do want to recognize the former speaker from Scarborough–Agincourt and just note the history in this Parliament. He’s the first Armenian to be elected in any Legislature in the history of this country. I very much value his thoughtful input in public service. He has done this for many years as a jurist and in many other capacities. So I want to thank the member from Scarborough–Agincourt for his leadership here in Parliament.

Madam Speaker, I want to comment on the motion before us today. It is so clear that we made a solemn commitment to the people of Ontario to restore hope and accountability in government. We also said we would make life affordable for the people of this province. We are doing that. We’ve taken decisive action, immediate action. It’s somewhat unprecedented to recall this House. As you know, we’ll be sitting for some days longer, to get to work to fulfill the commitments we made to the people of this province.

While we may disagree in good faith on the issues before us and the policy prescriptions of how we solve the problems, I do think it is important for any government to make a commitment and to deliver on it. There are many people in this province, perhaps many young people, disillusioned by politics because politicians of any stripe do not fulfill their commitments. I think this undermines the integrity of our democracy and the confidence they have in the institution of democracy. So I am proud to be part of a government that is doing exactly what we said we were going to do, particularly when it comes to creating an opportunity in society for the next generation.

We’ve put forth a strong, credible plan under the last bill, Bill 2, the Urgent Priorities Act, that is obviously taking action in three ways that I think are important.

The fact that we are sitting longer, the fact that we remain in this House, the fact that we have signalled to the people that the work continues and that we’re going to continue to roll up our sleeves, is another indication to the people of this province that there’s more work to do to better their lives and to put more money in their pockets.

We believe in an enterprise society where people who work hard and those who want to pursue the dream of the dignity of work should be able to do that unimpeded by government.

Madam Speaker, in the most recent legislation that has passed—and as of this morning, I understand that it received royal assent—we know that the acts we’re taking will help us reduce hydro rates for working people. There are so many people in every single region of this province—it’s not just germane to the people of King–Vaughan; it is in every region. It is in Waterloo. It is in Scarborough. It is in Kenora. It is everywhere, where working people feel the struggle and the pinch of higher taxes and of course the higher hydro rates that are imposed on them.

We know, in all of our ridings, that this phenomenon should not continue, that this is an unacceptable reality for too many people, particularly our seniors, the people who have spent an entire life to help build this country. Yet, in their latter years of life, they have to choose between—it’s often remarked on, but I don’t believe it’s a talking point.

I have met many people in my riding—wonderful Italian speakers; little nonnas—who tell me they came to this country in the 1950s or 1960s and worked very hard in the apprenticeship of being a Canadian. They raised their family, helped their kids get ahead, and now at 70 or 80 years old, they can’t even make the choice of putting food on their table. Many of the seniors in my riding have to actually consider selling their homes simply to get by.

Again, I do think this is an unacceptable reality in 2018, in the greatest country in the world, in one of the most prosperous countries in world. This is unacceptable. We came to government with a mandate to help change that trajectory, to put more money back in the pockets of working people and to give seniors the respect they deserve in the latter years of their life.

We also made a commitment to end the waste—the wasteful contracts, the bad energy contracts that have manifested in government and the Ministry of Energy for too many years. The former government was rather content with signing these contracts at any cost—ideologically driven—no matter what, even if it meant higher costs for the ratepayers of Ontario.

Madam Speaker, obviously the people of Ontario have questioned the judgment of the former government and resolutely decided that that approach should not continue.

We have taken a different approach, one that is really rooted in a belief that we must get our energy system back on track and make it affordable, sustainable, and ultimately allow people in Ontario—as well as small business—to be able to live and sustain themselves.

So we’ve taken action. In one signature of a pen, the Minister of Energy just last week signed an order that will in effect save over $700 million for the taxpayers of this province over the years of those contracts. I think that is leadership. I think that is another example of the minister and the government taking action to save people money, and it is very much congruent with the campaign commitments we made. This goes back to an earlier point about promises made, promises kept: It should not be a slogan. This should be the way governments operate at all levels for all parties.

In some respects—

Mrs. Robin Martin: Hear, hear.

Mr. Stephen Lecce: Thank you to the member from Eglinton–Lawrence for her enthusiasm this morning.

In some respects, we’re being mocked for invoking a phrase that positions the people of this province at the very centre of what government is. That is precisely what democracy was predicated on: service to people. We will not apologize for making that the central mantra of our government. We will not apologize for ensuring that people in this province, particularly those who felt disillusioned by big, bloated, ineffective government, finally, after 15 long years, know that we will work hard for them each and every day in the service of the people in every region of this province.

Madam Speaker, we also made a commitment, as you know, to bring new leadership to the board of Hydro One. We made it clear that that was our objective—perhaps a lofty goal. I mean, I must admit, the fact that it was done so quickly—honest to God, it’s just incredible that that was achieved. I must give the cabinet—

Interjection.

Mr. Stephen Lecce: To the member from Waterloo—

Ms. Catherine Fife: I’d like to see the deal. I’d like to see it.

Mr. Stephen Lecce: To the member from Waterloo: We took immediate action. We took immediate action to do this. People said we couldn’t get it done. Under the leadership of this Premier, the Minister of Energy and cabinet, they were able to bring new leadership with not a single dollar of severance paid. That is, in itself, a success for the people, for the taxpayer and for those who want government to be on their side.

I know that this success perhaps irks other members of this House, but honestly, when government does something in the public interest—I had a wonderful interview on TVO about the rookies of Parliament, and I said that I would acknowledge when a good idea comes before this Parliament. When any party does something right, I am prepared in my own conscience to stand up and say that is a good idea.

When government actually fulfills a commitment of new leadership—not a single dollar of severance. Look, I get it. We just finished an election, and maybe we’re still in that spirit. I certainly am in some respects, Madam Speaker, as you’ve seen in recent days. But could we acknowledge success when it is achieved, when taxpayers are better off? I would submit we should.

We also made a commitment—and it’s something that I know will perhaps divide me and the members opposite—to put students first. I appreciate that the members opposite were ill prepared to put the interests of 45,000 young people first.

What we have done, after the longest strike in the history of this country, the longest strike in post-secondary history—this is nothing to celebrate, by the way. Obviously, many students in my riding have been very affected by this strike—over 100 days. It is just wrong. So we as a government and as a Parliament need to make sure that the focus of young people—making sure that they are enabled to achieve their full, God-given potential—should be at the centre of what we do.

Of course, there are two political parties, or certainly one, that are ill prepared to make that commitment to the next generation. But it is this government and this Premier who made a solemn commitment to get our young people back to school. We recalled the Legislature with that mandate, and yesterday—I am proud to reaffirm and report, if I may, that the students of York University will be back in the classroom this September.

We obviously recognize there’s more to do, and this motion, I think, intimates and indicates to the people of Ontario that there’s more to do. Yes, we have achieved incremental successes for taxpayers, for young people, for all Ontarians, but we recognize, I recognize, there’s more to do. I didn’t come here to have a good time; I came here to serve people. I came here to work for the people, if I may reaffirm, because this is very much at the centre of why I’m here.

There’s more to do, particularly in health care. Recently, I was fortunate to grab a bite with the member from Brampton South, who is in this House today—a great, capable member and parliamentary assistant. Talk about leadership from Brampton: He indicated to me the need to take decisive action on hallway health care at Brampton Civic, an issue that I know he cares deeply about and an issue that our government cares deeply about.

Mackenzie Health in Richmond Hill, in Vaughan: The member from Richmond Hill will certainly echo these points, that we need to have more front-line investments to help reduce the wait times that are so brutal in hospitals today. So we’re going to be taking action in this respect. We’re going to be taking action.

As the member from Waterloo said earlier—a prolific heckler of mine, I will say. She talked about creating an advantage—

Ms. Catherine Fife: That’s not fair. I’m being good.

Mr. Stephen Lecce: You’re very effective. That’s a compliment to the member from Waterloo.

But I will say that she spoke about the importance of her region. I’ll be going to visit Google in Kitchener-Waterloo in the coming weeks to understand how we can enable our tech and our innovators in that region of Ontario to continue to succeed.

I will submit to the member—and, through you, Madam Speaker, I will submit to all members—that the way we achieve that is by ensuring that those small business, those innovators who are pioneering in research and development in this country, have the tools to succeed, that we give them a competitive advantage.

In our own judgment, we must acknowledge that the imposition of higher taxes and regulations on private enterprise is actually not the way to incentivize business to grow in Kitchener-Waterloo; it is exactly the opposite. If we want to ensure that more innovation happens in this province—a more productive society where businesses can grow and prosper—we’re not going to do that by sitting idle with a carbon tax being imposed by the federal government—no.

We are going to stand up every single day against the interests of a federal government that is going outside their jurisdiction by imposing a regressive, punitive carbon tax on, yes, innovators in Kitchener-Waterloo, on exporters in Vaughan and on businesses across the province. We must take continued action in this respect.

Madam Speaker, I’m going to turn it over to the member from Thornhill. But I do want you to know that this motion is, if I may summarize, a clear indication to the people that we will continue to work very hard every single day in the pursuit of creating a society where businesses can grow and compete.

I hope all members will consider the leadership that this Premier has shown and consider the bills, the legislation, that we are going to put forth in the coming days and weeks to get our province back on track.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Further debate? I recognize the member from Thornhill.

Mrs. Gila Martow: Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. It’s wonderful to see you in the chair today.

We’re debating a motion today: “That, in the opinion of this House, the current government is a government for the people with a clear mandate to pursue policies that put more money in people’s pockets; create and protect jobs; address the hydro crisis; reduce hospital wait times; and restore accountability and trust in government.”

I have to say that when I’m reading this motion out, I am reminded of something that was posted yesterday on Twitter by Warren Kinsella, who is a political consultant. I think a lot of us inside and outside of this room know him quite well. What he said was, “No one can accuse this guy”—speaking of Doug Ford—“of slacking off. I’ve never seen anything like this.” I think this motion speaks to that, because we’ve really hit the ground running. We’ve recalled the Legislature during the summer recess.

What Mr. Kinsella was responding to was the fact that Doug Ford had announced in a statement that the Legislature is going to continue to sit for at least another two to three weeks. What we’re trying to do is not just to work on our campaign promises. It’s not just about promises made and promises kept. It’s about ensuring that future generations in Ontario have the same opportunities that all of us felt when we were growing up.

When we’ve been talking about back-to-work legislation—and the member from King–Vaughan was correct: our focus was on the students. I think that we on this side of the House were really able to really focus on what the students have been going through—the longest strike in Canadian history in a post-secondary institution. We were trying to imagine what we went through. Most of us did go to college and university; fortunately, we had the opportunity.

We imagined what those students were feeling—a five-month strike—what the students who are entering York University in September, or planning to enter, what they were feeling when the strike was still ongoing. Should they withdraw? Should they have applied to another program? Should they look for a job? We really, I think, emotionally were able to connect with those students. I’m glad that we passed that legislation yesterday, and I’m glad that those students are going to have the opportunities that they should have, the opportunities that most of us here in the House had.

It’s about affordability, accountability, about returning trust. It’s not just about the issues of the day; it’s not just about the problems we’re always going to be facing. Unfortunately, we know that there are going to be new problems that we can’t even predict. We’re going to deal with those problems.

But we want to deal with it in an atmosphere where the public feels that they’re consulted, the public feels that they can trust all of us to work together to do what’s best for everybody—not just what’s best for an employer, not just what’s best for an employee, not just what’s best for students or just best for the professors or the Tas. It’s about considering and balancing the needs of everybody in Ontario.

Yes, we’re concerned about the environment. Yes, we’re concerned about having clean air and clean water for ourselves, for our children, for our grandchildren and our neighbours. But we need to do it in an atmosphere where the economy is robust. We need a robust economy in order to end hallway medicine, in order to fund our universities and colleges and training programs.

I think that a lot of us here are feeling the energy in the room. We have a lot of new members, partly because we grew the Legislature and we had some new ridings and partly because we had a big change. But the young members that we have here, the energy that they’re showing all of us to get to work—no grumblings; everybody is working hard.

It’s hard to recall the Legislature. I want to remind everybody at home that it’s not easy to recall the Legislature. A lot of people do not have their offices set up, do not have their staff set up. They don’t have a printer. We’re sharing printers and we’re all managing. It’s a real collaborative effort here in the Legislature. We know it’s hot outside, and sometimes it gets a little hot in here, even with the air conditioning, but we’re focusing on our campaign promises—just to touch on a few—to deal with the growing debt.

We just can’t be continuing to spend over $1 billion a month on interest payments on the debt. It just cannot continue. We all know that interest rates could rise and probably will rise.

We want to reduce the corporate tax rate from 11.5% to 10.5% and, as well, reduce the tax rate for small businesses. We want to take 10 cents a litre off of gasoline, and we’re already working towards that. We wanted to take another 12% off of people’s hydro electricity rates, even added to the 25% the previous government promised.

The focus here isn’t just about subsidizing—collecting taxes from businesses and individuals in order to subsidize electricity rates. That’s not the kind of lowering that we want on this side of the House. The kind of lowering we want is decision-making that actually causes the root cost to go down so that people’s electricity rates go down.

We already saw—and it was, I think, an important message to the people of Ontario that we managed to so quickly have the board resign at Hydro One. The CEO stepped down with zero severance. It’s a message. It’s a message that we are not going to put up with wasting taxpayer dollars and that we are going to create an atmosphere that’s fair to everybody in the province of Ontario.

We’re going to create long-term-care beds. We have to end hallway medicine, and one of the ways that we can achieve that is by having long-term-care beds, and perhaps having more hospice beds as well. We want to deal with the autism file and ensure that every student in Ontario, if they need therapy, they are getting the therapy.

I look forward to many more comments and I appreciate this opportunity to rise and speak on this important motion.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Further debate. I recognize the member from Nickel Belt.

M me France Gélinas: Thank you so much, Speaker. It is a great honour to see you in the chair. I think you were meant to do this job, and I know that you will do an excellent job as a Speaker of this assembly.

I would like to put a few comments on the record regarding this motion that was tabled. The motion talks about the priority to create and protect jobs, to address the hydro crisis and to reduce hospital wait times. I will speak about all three of those priorities that are put forward.

I represent the riding of Nickel Belt. When you hear about Sudbury and nickel and you think about the mines, well, all of the mines are in my riding. There are many of them and, I’m hoping, many more to come. But I must tell you that although the mining industry is an important economic driver for all of Ontario, they are worried, Speaker. They are worried because of all of the uncertainty that this new government has brought forward. When you “scrap” things—that’s the language that they use—without replacing it with a thoughtful replacement, it leaves business with instability. Business needs to plan for a long period of time. They need certainty to be able to be successful.

I will put into the record a letter that I’ve received. They’re called Sudbury Integrated Nickel Operations, better known as Glencore. They are the second-largest mining company in the Sudbury area. They basically wrote to me because they are worried, Speaker. They are worried. They have plans to spend close to $1.2 billion in my riding. They have announced that this will be done through an investment of US$720 million—they always deal in US, for reasons unknown—in Onaping Depth.

Onaping is a part of my riding that already has a mine. They have technology now that allows them to go way deeper to get the minerals, but that requires an investment, an investment of $720 million that they are willing to do, which “will secure a mining future for our operation well beyond 2021,” because this is one of the mines that we thought was coming to the end of its useful life.

They are also planning to invest US$140 million to complete what is called the Process Gas Project at their smelter, to reduce SO 2 emissions. This is on top of the US$180 million that they’ve already invested into this project.

Glencore has also announced a US$450-million investment to develop the Raglan Mine. Although Raglan is in Quebec, it is important to us, because all of the nickel that is mined in Quebec is actually shipped to Sudbury and it is further concentrated at the smelter that is located in Sudbury. Without this investment into Raglan, then the Sudbury Smelter would not have enough feed to keep going.

Combined, all of these projects total up to US$1.3 billion that will be invested mainly into Sudbury, creating thousands of jobs and maintaining thousands of jobs.

“However”—and this is where the uncertainty of this government is really felt deeply in Sudbury—“to ensure these and future investment are fully realized we must have regulatory certainty.” They go on to say: “Achieving certainty around carbon pricing in light of the new government’s proposed scrapping of the current cap and trade program. We must quickly have clarity around any potential” changes “and the impact it may have on our operations and investments.”

We’re talking about a US$1.3-billion investment that is going to be done, that is on the record, that is on the books—for infrastructure that exists. That is not pie in the sky. Those are investments that should be done.

They go on to say that “98% of the energy used by our Sudbury operations is carbon-free; these factors must be considered when assessing the impact any carbon pricing would have on our operations.”

To leave them high and dry, to leave them with scrapping programs—it doesn’t matter if you like cap-and-trade or not; at least it gives them certainty. It gives them the argument they could take to their shareholders and say, “We need a $1.3-billion investment in our Sudbury operation and here are the facts, and here is what the future is going to look like.”

They go on to say, “Having confidence in our projected electricity costs. Electricity is one of our largest expenses, and our exposure to increased costs is material as we have one of two remaining smelters in the province, operated with an electric furnace. Currently, in order to take advantage of existing pricing incentives, we must curtail our operations—and incur the productivity costs of doing so—more than a dozen times a year, a fact that is problematic while investing and building new mines.”

I wanted to put that on the record because those are real investments. They’re not possibilities of investment and then saying we’re open for business. This is a real business that has a real business plan. You can go on their website and see that those investments are there and have been announced by their shareholders. They’re coming to Sudbury, but all of this is at risk, Speaker. Why? Because we have a government that decided to scrap things, create uncertainty and not say what will come next.

Did you know that Glencore is the biggest electricity user in all of Ontario? Of everybody that pays an electricity bill, Glencore is the biggest user of electricity. When they use their furnace, if things are not melting the way they are—I’m not a mining engineer. Basically they turn the heat up. Every time they turn their heat up, they need more electricity.

I was going to go into others, but I will stick with mining for a while, and I will talk about IAMGOLD. The name will tell you what it’s all about: a gold mine, yes. IAMGOLD is a mid-tier gold-mining company that has four operations on three continents, and one is in my riding. It is in Côté Lake. Côté Lake is located between Sudbury and Timmins. It is Canada’s largest undeveloped gold project, with an initial capital expenditure of over $1 billion. Côté Lake, the gold project, has the potential to be a state-of-the-art project creating more than 1,000 construction jobs and 4,000 full-time jobs.

Those are well-paying, family-sustaining jobs that come with benefits and pension plans and allow families to have a good life.

Ms. Catherine Fife: We need those jobs.

M me France Gélinas: We need those kinds of jobs, absolutely. So when Côté Lake enters production, which we expect to be in 2021, we expect it to have about a minimum of a 16-year lifespan.

Their big financial backer is called Sumitomo, which is a Chinese investment company. It is the first time that this Chinese investment company is willing to invest in Ontario, Speaker. But now, the same as what I was telling you, the mining industry is really uncomfortable with what this government is doing.

It’s fine to have a slogan when you want to campaign, but you are not campaigning anymore. You are governing this province. When you govern this province, don’t use slogans anymore, because huge mining companies are not comfortable with slogans. They want to know what the policies will be. They need to be able to read it; they need to be able to share it with their shareholders so that those people who put up $1 billion—that’s a lot of zeros. Those are real people, those are real investors, and they need to be convinced that they are investing in this jurisdiction in Ontario where their money will be able to be respected.

Because it’s a new mine, they talk about permitting. Because there is a change in minister and a change with amalgamations of ministries, they are kind of anxious to see what that will mean to all of the permitting that a new mine needs to get. So far, Côté has received a positive decision on the federal environmental assessment in 2016 and a positive decision on the provincial environment assessment in January 2017, but they still need many permits. Things change, things evolve. What does that mean, now that we have a whole bunch of new people in a ministry that has been amalgamated?

Again, I quote from their letter: “It is critically important that the project secures power at an affordable rate.” They are looking to the Northern Industrial Electricity Rate program as central to the development of this project.

Business needs certainty. Slogans don’t work. We are talking a $1-billion investment in my riding in Ontario by a company that we all know has the means to do that kind of investment. But here again, a promise that was made, an investment that we thought was coming, is now on shakier ground because of the way this government behaves.

The government cannot behave with slogans. This has to stop. You have to put forward policies that people can read, that people can take to their shareholders and that make sense to business. None of this is coming from this government right now.

We have a three-line motion that we are debating this morning—sorry, a four-line—a three-and-a-half-line motion. Do not cut it. Businesses that invest billions of dollars in real jobs, in family-sustaining jobs, do not make decisions based on a three-and-a-half-line motion. They need a government that governs, not a government that continues to campaign. You are there for all 14 million of us. You are there for all the thousands of businesses. Stop campaigning and start governing. Otherwise, those good-paying jobs in my riding and throughout Ontario are all at risk.

I will give examples of things that government can do, and government should do, as soon as my papers get better organized. Here we go.

The next one I wanted to talk about—thank you, Catherine—looks pretty small in the grand scheme of things but is huge for some children in my riding. It has to do with something as simple as a crosswalk.

The community is Dowling. It’s a beautiful little community. I have a provincial highway that goes straight through the middle of the community. Nickel Belt is made up of 33 little communities, none of them big enough to have a mayor or a city council or any of this. They’re all little northern villages. Dowling is part of the city of Greater Sudbury. It has a highway going through it that’s typical of most of the communities you find in Nickel Belt. We either have a train track going in the middle or a provincial highway going through the middle of our towns. This one has a provincial highway.

The school is on one side of the highway and the community is on the other side of the highway. Most of the people in Nickel Belt walk to school. Every child who walks to school has to cross the highway. It’s a four-lane highway with large shoulders and huge trucks—because remember, all the mines that I was talking to you about put ore in the trucks and the trucks bring it to the smelter right down that highway. That’s Highway 144.

For years now, we were asking for a crosswalk, talking with the Ministry of Transportation. The Ministry of Transportation has agreed that this is a dangerous area, that a crosswalk must be built. But then we have a change in government and delays start to happen. But the school year is only weeks away, Speaker. It’s only weeks away. We have a government here that’s supposed to be for the people. Well, I hope it’s also for the little children of Dowling, who need to cross the street safely in order to go to school.

When you have a change in ministry, when you have a whole bunch of uncertainty, projects kind of fall in mid-air. There is no construction that has started on this project. I don’t want to single out a worker, but we reached out to local people at the Ministry of Transportation, who said, “I do appreciate your patience and I understand the frustration with the lengthy process. I can assure you that we are working” as fast—basically telling us that there are no decisions being made within the ministry and that they cannot move this project along.

This is what governing is all about. Yes, it is a project that was approved by the previous government but, really, Speaker, would you say no to a crosswalk for little kids who need to cross a four-lane highway? Who says no to that? Nobody. We all know that it needs to be done. We all know that those kids are at risk. We all know that there have been a number of close calls. Let’s get that done. Let’s get that done right away.

We’re not talking a whole lot of money, but we’re talking the lives of little kids that will be at risk starting in September when they start to ride their bikes and cross the highway to go to school. It’s still dangerous in the summer because the ball field is also across the street and it is very well used. There is a playground there that is very well used. It’s all on the other side of the highway from where the village is.

I encourage the Ministry of Transportation to look at this seriously and give it the last go-ahead that needs to happen so that this project gets done and we can kind of tick that one off the list, that from now on the kids will have a safe way to go to school and to go see the ball games.

Funny how 20 minutes sometimes go way faster than others, eh?

Okay, so you have reducing hospital wait times as one of your priorities. I’m all for this. I can tell you that almost every large community hospital in Ontario has a long wait-list. Almost all large community hospitals in Ontario are facing hallway medicine, hallway nursing, because they are full to overcapacity. We all know that overcapacity is directly linked to wait times, because if you’re admitted through the emergency department, you will stay in the emergency department hallway, cupboards, washrooms—anywhere—because there are no places for you to be admitted into one of the wards or one of the units.

The reality is, at Health Sciences North, which is the name of the hospital in Sudbury, they’re facing an $11-million budget deficit. Why? Yes, because of the previous Liberal government, but right here, right now, they are laying off people. There are good health care workers—nurses, RPNs, lab techs—who are receiving layoff notices. Those layoff notices are under your watch.

You’re talking about a hospital that has been at over 100% capacity for years now and that is facing a budget deficit. You are the government. You are in a position where you can change this. You can fund the hospital the $5 million it needs out of the $11 million—they have negotiated a one-year deal with the local health integration network. They are still laying off people to make up the $5-million deficit in their budget. That shouldn’t be.

In a hospital that is full, at overcapacity, that has one of the longest wait times in our province for many procedures as well as ER, they should not be laying off nurses and RPNs and lab techs and everybody else who makes this hospital work. They should at least keep the staff that they have. But they don’t have the money to do this, and this rests on your shoulders right now because you are in a position where you could change this today. I hope you will.

I thank you for your time, and again, congratulations on being in the chair and a Speaker of this House.

Debate deemed adjourned.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): It being 10:15, this House is now recessed until 10:30.

The House recessed from 1015 to 1030.

Introduction of Visitors

Mr. Parm Gill: I want to recognize and welcome two amazing individuals from my riding of Milton: Lynn Robinson and Sue Sleath. Both of these individuals do amazing work in the community and devote lots of their time. Please help me welcome Lynn and Sue to the members’ gallery.

Miss Kinga Surma: I would like to welcome Nick Sklar, who is a resident of Etobicoke Centre, was a key member of my campaign and is also a member of the police force.

Mr. Aris Babikian: Speaker, congratulations on your election as the Speaker of the House. I would like to introduce one of my youngest volunteers during the campaign, Aris Movsessian. He is 12 years old.

Mrs. Nina Tangri: I’d like to welcome my family here today: my husband, Ashwani; my son, Ran; and my daughter-in-law, Pooja, who very, very patiently worked with me on election campaigns for many years. I’d like to thank them and all the families of all the members here for the patience that they have.

Mr. Stan Cho: I’m honoured to introduce a number of friends and family who worked tirelessly on my campaign in Willowdale.

Bear with me: Sam Moini; Jun and Trinidad Calaguio; Andrew Brethour; Judy Wilson; Diana Laza; Michael Klassen; Dena Gouweloos; Christina and Ria Botsis; David Cohen; Raymond Lou; Jackson Le; Leo Teng; Kathy Liu; Brett McDermott; Peter Durrant; Reese Nemeth; Byung Yeok Cho; Ken Yoo; Ian Choi; Jang Sung Lee; Michele Cole; Mark Weir; Hilary Cole; Ari Moghimi; David Lu; my campaign manager and new EA, a brother from another mother, Ryan Cole; my aunt and cousin, Kyung Sang and Eun Kyu Lee; my fiancée, Carolyn, and her parents, Barb and Ed Horbaczyk; my brother from the same mother, and his wife, Richard and Michelle Cho; and my amazing parents, John and Sandy Cho, without whom I would not be here.

Ms. Catherine Fife: I’d like to welcome my long-suffering husband: Dale Fife is here, originally from Peterborough. Welcome, Dale.

Mrs. Daisy Wai: Good morning, Mr. Speaker. I would like to introduce my brother Patrick Yau, and Joyce Yau, who came all the way from Hong Kong to visit their daughter and also to enjoy the beautiful summer in Ontario.

I would also like to welcome my other brother, Eric Yau, and sister-in-law, Inez Yau. Not only do they serve as directors in my EDA; they were also the greatest supporters for my fundraising and my valued donors. Thank you very much.

I also have my sister, Pastor Teresa Tong, who has always been praying for me and with me.

Thank you very much, all of you. You are valued family members.

Mr. Tom Rakocevic: I’d like to warmly welcome former NDP candidate and urban planner Darnel Harris.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Are there any more introductions of visitors? The member for Thornhill.

Mrs. Gila Martow: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I know I’m short, so I have to wave pieces of paper to be seen here.

I’d like to introduce David Cohen. He’s in the west gallery. He’s from the developmental services provincial network and partnership, and he’s also a board member at a very well-known organization, Reena, which supports people with developmental disabilities from Richmond Hill.

Thank you for being here, David.

Hon. Christine Elliott: I’d like to welcome a visiting group from Nigeria who are here with us today: Senator James Manager; Senator Atai Aidoko; Senator Tijjani Yahaya Kaura; Senator Alasoadura Donald Omotayo; Mr. Musa Bello Muhammad, Clerk to the Committee; Mr. Dikko Haske, director, legal, federal Ministry of Mines and Steel Development; and Olawale Fapohunda, legal adviser to the honourable federal minister of mines and solid minerals. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I thank the Deputy Premier for making that introduction.

It is now time for oral questions.

Oral Questions

Mental health services

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My question is to the Deputy Premier. Why is the Premier cutting new funding for mental health by $330 million a year?

Hon. Christine Elliott: Thank you for the question, but in fact, we are adding to funding for mental health. We are committing $3.8 billion over 10 years: $1.9 billion from the provincial government, to match the $1.9 billion coming from the federal government.

The Liberal government, in the past, made a lot of promises during the election campaign, but we know how solid those promises are and we know how accurate they are.

This is the biggest commitment in Canadian history to mental health and addictions. We are committed to creating a comprehensive system that addresses all of the needs of the people of Ontario.

Interjections.

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

Supplementary.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Addictions and Mental Health Ontario says $2.4 billion in new funding is needed over the next four years, but instead of delivering, the Premier is dragging Ontario backwards. The Premier has cut $2.1 billion over four years and replaced it with $1.9 billion over 10 years. Even the Premier can do that math. Instead of delivering, the Premier is dragging Ontario backwards.

Why is the Premier of Ontario cutting new funding by $330 million each and every year and leaving thousands of people without the mental health care that they need?

Hon. Christine Elliott: Mr. Speaker, through you to the leader of the official opposition, that is not happening. We are adding to mental health funding. I would suggest that the leader of the official opposition’s math is about as bad as the previous Liberal government’s math.

We made a commitment to the people of Ontario that we are going to create a comprehensive system. We are making the biggest investment in Canadian history, and we are going to follow through on that. We made a promise to the people of Ontario. Promise made, promise kept.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Stop the clock. Members, please take your seats. Start the clock.

Final supplementary.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Today, there are over 12,000 children waiting over 18 months to get the mental health care supports that they need. It is disgraceful. And there are 13,000 people in Toronto alone waiting five years for the supportive housing that they need.

The Premier’s cut of $330 million annually is not going to end the crisis that we continue to have in mental health care in this province.

Why is this government and this Premier cutting funding for mental health care services that are so desperately needed across our province?

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Members, please take your seats.

Response?

Hon. Christine Elliott: Mr. Speaker, again, through you to the leader of the official opposition, I am certainly well aware of the situation for mental health and addictions in the province of Ontario.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Then do something about it.

Hon. Christine Elliott: I am doing something about it. We’re making the biggest commitment in Canadian—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I apologize. I can’t hear the Deputy Premier because of the noise coming from the government side. I have to be able to hear the member who is answering the question or asking the question.

Deputy Premier?

Hon. Christine Elliott: May I remind the leader of the official opposition that there was a Select Committee on Mental Health and Addictions in Ontario that all three parties worked on? And may I remind the member that the Liberal government was the government that didn’t do anything on this file? May I remind you of that? We are going to follow up on our commitments.

Interjections.

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

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: That would be the government you supported 97% of the time.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order.

Next question.

Government policies

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My next question is also for the Deputy Premier.

The Premier is driven by backroom deals that help his friends, and we see it again with the disastrous decision to deny climate change and drag Ontario backwards. Cancelling cap-and-trade helps big polluters and puts more money in the pockets of the richest people in our province. In fact, families making over $150,000 a year are going to benefit by about $430 each and every year in their pockets where low-income families are going to get $8.58 a month.

Why is the Premier helping the biggest polluters and the richest people while the little guy gets stiffed?

Hon. Christine Elliott: To the Minister of the Environment.

Hon. Rod Phillips: Mr. Speaker, through you to the leader of the official opposition, Ontario’s carbon tax era is over.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Stop the clock. Members will take their seats. Restart the clock.

Hon. Rod Phillips: We campaigned on a clear commitment to put money back into the pockets of Ontarians. We will be putting $260 back into their pockets.

We know where this side of the House stands: We’re against a carbon tax. How much will the carbon tax be that the Leader of the Opposition would propose? Will it be the highest carbon tax in the world, as their caucus has provided?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Speaker, any way you cut it, the little guy is getting stiffed. That $8.58 a month is the only benefit that everyday families are going to see, while the richest Ontarians and the biggest polluters are going to be laughing all the way to the bank, just like the Conservatives like it, because that’s what they’re all about. The Premier is the biggest friend that big polluters have seen in years in this province.

The Premier’s climate change denial legislation says that the government will set targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. So I want to ask this government: Will they commit to ensuring that their new targets that they’re going to be bringing forward, apparently, are higher and tougher than Ontario’s current targets, or are they going to be beholden to big polluters?

Hon. Rod Phillips: I appreciate this: the Leader of the Opposition is correct. We are going to be putting targets forward. It is required as part of the bill, as you would expect.

But what I find difficult is how the NDP and the Leader of the Opposition make light of putting money back into taxpayers’ pockets. It shows a lack of understanding of the reality in Ontario for working families today. These families need the money. We were elected on this commitment, the commitment to put money back in people’s pockets, to get rid of a carbon tax, to get rid of a cap-and-trade scheme that wasn’t working. That’s what we’re doing.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Sit down. Please take your seats. Stop the clock. Restart the clock.

Final supplementary.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: While the Premier takes care of big polluters and the richest people, and stiffs the little guy with $8.58 a month, he’s creating massive uncertainty for Ontario’s job creators and for everyone who has a contract with the Ontario government. The Business Council of Canada says that the Premier’s decisions are undermining investor confidence and putting Ontario’s reputation at risk.

Under cap-and-trade, businesses spent billions for allowances, trusting that they would be honoured. With the stroke of a pen, the Premier says that those credits are now worthless. How can anyone trust the Premier to respect a contract?

Hon. Rod Phillips: The feedback I’ve been getting from business is positive about this government. Business understands, job creators understand that a lower-tax, lower-regulation regime is what’s going to create jobs.

But I’ll return the question, perhaps, for another one to the Leader of the Opposition: How much is too much for your carbon tax? Is it $20? Is it $50, which the Prime Minister wants? Is it $150? What is too much in terms of tax for Ontarians for the NDP?

Addiction services

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My next question is for the Deputy Premier.

Ontario is in the midst of an opioid overdose crisis, an emergency. Supervised injection sites and overdose prevention sites are saving lives in cities and towns across our province each and every day, but for two days in a row, the Premier of this province has refused to say that he supports this life-saving work.

Will the Deputy Premier commit today to keeping Ontario’s supervised injection sites and overdose prevention sites open in order to keep saving lives?

Hon. Christine Elliott: Thank you to the leader of the official opposition for her question.

As Premier Ford has indicated, he wants to know the evidence about the supervised injection sites and the overdose prevention sites. As a matter of fact, I had a meeting with Ministry of Health representatives yesterday. I am starting my consultation process. I am going to be rendering a report to the Premier in the near future.

We do take this very seriously. We are losing too many people from the opioid overdose problem. We are taking action right away and we will be making a decision in the very near future.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Ms. Andrea Horwath: The evidence is overwhelmingly clear—and maybe the Premier should have done his homework before making people very, very worried about the future of the safe injection sites in our province.

The effectiveness of supervised injection sites and overdose prevention sites has been studied for years and years. That’s why they have been put in place by so many communities across our country. In Ontario, they are saving lives each and every day.

During the campaign, the Premier said that he was dead against these sites. He ignored all of the public health evidence and ignored the voices of communities across Ontario.

Will the Deputy Premier end the uncertainty right now, acknowledge that the research has been done, do the homework and commit to keeping Ontario’s supervised injection sites and overdose prevention sites open so they can keep saving lives in Ontario?

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Stop the clock. Members will take their seats. Restart the clock.

Deputy Premier, response?

Hon. Christine Elliott: Mr. Speaker, through you to the leader of the official opposition, we are very well aware of the situation. As you will know, the Premier subsequently made a comment indicating that he wanted to see the evidence to support the use of continued supervised injection sites and overdose prevention sites.

We are taking a look at that now. We are gathering the evidence. I will be making a report to the Premier in the very near future. It is a priority for me and for the Ministry of Health. We are working on it now. We want to make sure that we can come to the right decision, and we will.

Taxation

Mr. Stan Cho: My question is for the Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks.

One of the pillars of our Ontario PC government’s plan for the people was to end the cap-and-trade program—nothing more than another Liberal slush fund. I’m sure, like me, my colleagues on this side of the House heard time and time again that their constituents had had enough of this program put in place by the previous government.

We’ve heard that the people of Ontario are fed up. They need life in this province to be affordable again.

I’d like to ask the minister, for the benefit of the House, how this ineffective program put a strain on our economy and the people of Ontario.

Hon. Rod Phillips: Mr. Speaker, through you to the member from Willowdale: Thank you for the question. I’m certainly impressed by all the friends and family you have.

Our government was elected on a clear mandate: to put people first and make life affordable for families in Ontario. Equally clear was our commitment to scrap the previous Liberal government’s cap-and-trade program, and that is what we’re doing. It was an honour to stand in this place yesterday and to introduce that bill, my first piece of legislation as a minister here. In doing so, we fulfill a promise to the people of Ontario.

Mr. Speaker, we understand the challenges of climate change. We understand the problem. We disagree on the solution. The member asked what the problems were. The problems were that the cap-and-trade system, a carbon tax system, punishes low- and middle-income families. It punishes them daily for simple choices like choosing to drive a car. Those are not the solutions that we think will work. We will bring forward those solutions, but today we’re talking about the end of the carbon tax era.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Mr. Stan Cho: I’d like to thank the minister for another excellent answer.

Mr. Speaker, for years, families have struggled with the increased costs associated with this regressive tax. We’ve all heard the stories where people are literally having to choose between heating and eating. Businesses have also been reaching out to our PC government, begging for us to put an end to this program. They simply can’t compete with businesses in other jurisdictions while under the enormous weight of this tax.

Yesterday, the minister said that this government was very clear with the mandate that it received from the people of Ontario. It is staying true to its promises and scrapping this job-killing tax.

Can the minister explain, in real terms, what this legislation will mean for Ontario families and businesses?

Hon. Rod Phillips: Through you, Mr. Speaker, thank you to the member from Willowdale for the hard work he does for his constituents. I know he cares deeply about their best interests and the best interests of the province of Ontario.

A cap-and-trade carbon tax is a price increase on everything. We all know that winding down that price increase will be to the benefit of Ontarians. It’s a key step in fulfilling our government’s commitment, and it is an important next step in our other commitment to reduce gas prices by 10 cents a litre. Cheaper gas prices and lower energy bills will put more money in people’s pockets. Again, on the other side of the House, they make light of money in people’s pockets, but that’s going to mean $260 for an average Ontario family every year, year over year.

In addition to saving the money, we will eliminate the cost burden on Ontario businesses, giving them the potential to grow. It’s anticipated that the cancellation of cap-and-trade and reducing the fuel tax will increase Ontario employment by 14,000 jobs for Ontario families. That’s what’s in it to cancel cap-and-trade.

Curriculum

Ms. Marit Stiles: My question is for the Minister of Education.

This past weekend, we had a wonderful festival in Davenport called BIG on Bloor. At that festival, I met with many people who were gravely concerned about the repeal of the updated sexual education curriculum. We had a petition circulating, and within just a few hours, we had over 1,200 signatures.

So many people opened up to us with their stories. They expressed their very real fear that being excluded from the curriculum will force LGBTQ kids back into the closet. That means living in fear, depression and with thoughts of suicide. People kept asking us the same question: Why are we going backwards?

So I will ask this minister to stand up for all the students and young people she is responsible for and ensure that the 2015 curriculum remains in place, moving us forward, not backward.

Hon. Lisa M. Thompson: I want to assure this House I’m standing up for students across this province every day. In saying that, I invite the member opposite to join me in making sure that people in her constituency are aware of the comprehensive consultation that we’re going to be embarking on this fall. We’re respecting parents and following through on a campaign promise, because so many people were not listened to.

I look forward to everyone in this House working with me to ensure that parents are respected and every voice is represented.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Stop the clock. Members will please take their seats. Restart the clock.

Supplementary?

Ms. Marit Stiles: It is the youth and the children and the students who are calling on you not to revert back to the 1998 curriculum. Dragging the curriculum back to the 1998 version and starting the consultation in September completely fails the kids who are going to be in classrooms this fall, just a few weeks from now. This government is leaving students vulnerable to online bullying and is leaving kids without the language or tools to talk about consent and what a healthy or unhealthy relationship is.

Mr. Speaker, whether this government likes it or not, we live in 2018—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I apologize. I’d ask the members to come to order so that I can hear the member, who is so close to me and I can’t even hear her.

Response?

Hon. Lisa M. Thompson: I would like to respond by sharing a quote from the federal leader of the NDP. Mr. Singh said, “When it comes to proper consultation, it’s clear the Liberal government has not learned from previous mistakes.” Mr. Singh went on to say, “The lack of inclusive consultation before announcing the curriculum was disrespectful to parents in my constituency and a mistake on the Liberal government’s part.”

So, Speaker, I share with you, everyone in this House and the people across this province: We are going to get it right. I invite everyone to encourage people in their constituencies to get engaged this fall as we embark on the most comprehensive consultation the Ministry of Education has ever seen.

Immigrant and refugee services

Mrs. Nina Tangri: My question today is for the Minister of Children, Community and Social Services.

I have been watching the debate on immigration during question period in this House and with the federal government. Minister, first I must congratulate you for your respectful tone and for standing up for Ontario, its citizens and taxpayers. Unfortunately, the tone from the federal government isn’t as respectful, nor is it straightforward in its responses.

I saw Minister Hussen on television Tuesday evening, and he now claims that he doesn’t know how much illegal border crossers have cost Ontario. Have you asked the federal minister for compensation, and will you issue a formal bill?

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: Thank you very much for the question. To the member: I am so proud and delighted that she has become a member of this assembly. She and I travelled to India a few years ago and we’ve come a long way since then. Congratulations. I’m very proud of you.

Ontario obviously is a very welcoming society, as evidenced on the benches of this new government of ours. We have over 20 people who have immigrated, or were refugees to this country, in the Progressive Conservative caucus. I’m very proud of that.

But let me be perfectly clear: With the situation that’s happening at the border right now in Quebec, there has been an unprecedented strain on our resources here in the province of Ontario. That is why I travelled to Ottawa earlier this week to indicate to the federal government that we have a price tag of about $200 million, and they are only willing to come forward with about $11 million.

Let me itemize this bill for you, Speaker: $20 million in education costs; $90 million in social assistance costs; $74 million in shelter costs for Toronto; $12 million in shelter costs for the city of Ottawa. We need the money. We’re going to stand up for the province of Ontario.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Stop the clock. Members will take their seats. Please take your seats. Restart the clock.

Supplementary.

Mrs. Nina Tangri: Back to the minister: I thank the member for her answer and appreciate that the implication is that Mr. Hussen doesn’t consider these formal meetings useful or that what is said isn’t listened to.

My supplemental question on the same topic relates to this bill that keeps growing: How much is the bill for Ontario and its municipalities? Is the federal government a partner to Ontario? And do you expect that they will pay this bill?

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: Thanks again for the question—very important. The price tag right now for the province of Ontario, in response to the crisis created by the federal Liberal government, is $200 million. Earlier today, I sent a letter off to the federal government itemizing those costs and requesting compensation to make Ontario whole.

We will have a looming crisis on August 9, given that there are 800 people in college dormitories in the city of Toronto that will need to be vacated. We have not heard from the federal government what their relocation plan is for those individuals.

I can tell you today that we’re going to have a vote in the House. I do hope the New Democrats and I do hope the independent members will stand with every member of this government for the province of Ontario, for the people, and ensure that the federal government pays its—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Stop the clock. Members will take their seats. Restart the clock.

Member for Toronto–Danforth.

School facilities

Mr. Peter Tabuns: Thank you, Speaker. My question is to the Deputy Premier.

Schools across Ontario are crumbling, but instead of fixing our schools, the Premier chose to cut $100 million from school repairs.

Does the Deputy Premier think cutting $100 million from school repairs is good for students and for the next generation?

Hon. Christine Elliott: To the Minister of Education.

Hon. Lisa M. Thompson: I’m pleased to share with the House today that we understand that over the last 15 years, the Liberal government allowed schools to crumble, and it is absolutely concerning. That’s why I’m pleased with the work that we’re moving forward with in terms of working with both ministry officials as well as school boards across this province, and we are going to get it right and address priorities.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Mr. Peter Tabuns: Again to the Deputy Premier: The Premier told Ontarians that he was cancelling school repairs because of his short-sighted decision to cancel cap-and-trade. But in yesterday’s briefing on Bill 4, it turns out that that’s not true. Nothing is stopping the government from fixing schools. The cap-and-trade money was collected. It is available. These projects can move forward.

So why is the Premier not fixing our schools?

Hon. Lisa M. Thompson: I think it’s very important that we take the time today and share with the members opposite that the GGRF does not repair boilers. It does not repair the crumbling schools that happened under the Liberals’ watch. That’s why I am so pleased that I am committed to fixing schools. We are going to be working with our ministry officials as well as our school boards to get it right and clean up the Liberal mess once and for all.

Taxation

Mr. Michael Parsa: My question is to the Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks.

The cap-and-trade carbon tax is nothing more than a tax grab that punishes families and chases jobs out of Ontario. We promised that we would eliminate this tax and we are keeping our promise.

Yesterday, the Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks announced details of the legislation that would, if passed, formally end the cap-and-trade carbon tax era in Ontario. I have heard from many constituents who are praising this move by our government.

Speaker, I understand that this legislation would wind down the cap-and-trade carbon tax in a way that minimizes the risk to taxpayers while offering some support for eligible, registered participants in the previous program.

Would the minister please explain to this House what is contained in this legislation?

Hon. Rod Phillips: Mr. Speaker, through you to the member for Aurora–Oak Ridges–Richmond Hill. Thank you for that well-thought-out and insightful question.

The member asks the question and gives us an opportunity to explain the bill. The proposed legislation is about the responsible wind-down of the cap-and-trade program. It’s also about minimizing the cost to taxpayers. It includes the repeal of the cap-and-trade legislation, extinguishing an allowance, protecting taxpayers from further costs and setting out a regulatory framework for authority around compensation.

Compensation, however, will not be given to people who got free credits. Compensation will not be given to people who have used their credits for polluting. Compensation will be given appropriately, and that compensation estimate is considerably less than the many billions of dollars that were estimated before.

Yes, Mr. Speaker, it also requires us to develop a plan around climate change, develop targets and report back, which we will do.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Mr. Michael Parsa: Back to the minister: I thank you very much for this response, Minister.

I’m pleased to learn about this important legislation that respects taxpayers and fulfils our commitment to the people of Ontario. I have heard from many constituents who have concerns about our environment. While they don’t believe that our taxes are an appropriate solution, they recognize the challenges that climate change presents. The Liberals’ cap-and-trade carbon tax failed to deliver results and was nothing more than a tax grab. They want action to address environmental priorities, including clean air and water, conservation, lowering emissions and reducing litter and waste.

Can the minister please tell the House how he plans to balance these priorities?

Hon. Rod Phillips: Through you to the member from Aurora–Oak Ridges–Richmond Hill, Mr. Speaker: I can tell you that our government looks forward to moving past the previous government’s obsession with raising taxes and towards a working environmental plan that’s supported by the people of Ontario.

Our plan for the people made it clear that we’ll deliver on clean air and water, conservation, reducing emissions and cleaning up litter, garbage and waste. If passed, the legislation we are tabling will help us put together a plan that better addresses the real environmental concerns, including fighting climate change.

Our commitment is to put an effective plan in place. Our commitment is to do so without a regressive tax on the people of Ontario.

Affordable housing

Ms. Jessica Bell: My question is to the Minister for Municipal Affairs and Housing.

Recently, I was approached by a resident in my riding of University–Rosedale who is in distress because their landlord is trying to illegally evict them from their home. Her fear is that if she is evicted, she will not be able to afford to live in the neighbourhood that she loves; she’ll have to find a new school for her son; she’ll have to find a new daycare for her son, say goodbye to many of her friends and no longer be close to the job where she is located. Provided that she can even find an apartment, a one-bedroom in Toronto—as you probably all now know—rents for an average of $2,080 a month. It’s now the highest in Canada.

Ontarians should not be pushed out of the neighbourhoods that they know and love because of skyrocketing housing and unaffordable rent. My question is: What will this government do to ensure that renters can afford to put a roof over their head?

Hon. Steve Clark: I want to congratulate the member on being elected. I look forward to working with her in the chamber.

The issue of affordable housing, both in the rental market and also in the home ownership market, is a problem we’re very much aware of, particularly in the greater Toronto and Hamilton areas. My ministry works very diligently with our community partners, with the real estate industry, with developers, but also with our municipal partners and the federal government. We’re very aware of bringing in more supply, and supply is, I think, a key component.

In my supplementary, I’ll address her concerns regarding the Residential Tenancies Act and the issues that her constituent has had.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Ms. Jessica Bell: Thank you for bringing up the question about supply. A new report just came out—it was released by ACORN Canada—and it shows that over 40,000 new rental units have been built in Toronto over the last four years. However, only 1,000 of them are affordable. That’s one in 40 units.

Torontonians are finding it harder and harder and harder to find an affordable place that they can live in, and that’s completely unacceptable. When will this Conservative government commit to fixing Toronto’s housing prices so that families are not scrambling to pay the rent?

Hon. Steve Clark: I guess I will continue with supply, rather than the Residential Tenancies Act. If you would like to talk off-line about some of the issues that the tenant is facing, I’d be more than happy to engage with you.

In the issue of supply, I think our government was crystal clear during the election. We’re going to cut red tape and we’re going to streamline approvals to get more affordable housing online faster. It’s a responsibility, as I said in the opening question, that we have many, many stakeholders who want to work towards. I’ve had a number of conversations with Mayor Tory since my appointment to cabinet. He’s made it crystal clear to me that supply and affordable housing is top of mind for him. I plan on working with him and our other municipal partners.

Speaker, we have some fantastic service managers and Indigenous program administrators that my ministry works with. It’s something that we share, it’s something that we’re aware of, and it’s something that we’re looking forward to the opposition working, actually, with—

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

Next question.

Immigrant and refugee services

Mrs. Amy Fee: My question today is for the Minister of Children, Community and Social Services. Minister, I’ve been appalled by the treatment that you have received during the federal immigration hearings. The Liberal members of that committee chose to question your motives, suggesting racism and hatred lie in your request for fair treatment. They chose to ask questions about France, hate crimes, UN conventions and your language, rather than about the real impact illegal border crossers are having on Ontario.

I have heard that the bill for welfare, housing, education and immediate support is now over $200 million. I heard this week that you will support my motion today in this House to make it known to the federal government that your requests for compensation are being supported by wide-ranging Ontarians. What I want to know from you: Will you support my motion?

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: I would like to congratulate the member for her great question and her election to this House.

Let me be perfectly clear: Every member on the government side will vote for her motion. We will stand up for the integrity of our immigration system in the province of Ontario and nationally. We’re going to continue to welcome newcomers, but we have to be crystal clear with the federal government.

She’s right. The tone taken by the Liberal members at the House of Commons was absolutely appalling. They were not trying to be constructive. I went there with a $200-million price tag and I’m going to continue to press the federal government to invest in Ontario and to make sure that we are not only whole, but that we’re able to provide the public services our people so desperately need in the province of Ontario.

So I’ll ask the Liberals, the NDP and the Greens: Are you going to be with us or are you going to be against us this afternoon?

Interjections.

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

Supplementary question?

Mrs. Amy Fee: Back to the minister: I’d like to thank the minister for supporting me and for her answer. I’m glad my motion is coming forward today and that it will have the support of this government. My hope is that the federal government will be an honest and upstanding partner that will foot its bill.

My supplemental question, though, relates to the federal government’s role in immigration. I understand the federal government has full authority over our borders and immigration system. What I would like to know, Minister: Does our immigration system have integrity?

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: I represent one of the most diverse ridings in Ontario. The riding of Nepean is very diverse, welcoming people—and not just like me, from other parts of Canada, but people from all over the world. I think that has made our community richer, and I really value that.

But let me be perfectly clear. When I attended the federal hearings this past week—there are some challenges within our immigration system that are testing the people of Ontario’s patience. It is the turnaround time for claimants that is an issue. There is an issue at the border. I’m heartened that the federal government has appointed Minister Bill Blair to deal with the challenges that they have at the border, but they also have to come to grips with the $200-million price tag that it’s costing this government.

I would encourage the members opposite, who decided they want to rant and rave over there rather than to be constructive on this issue, to vote for us today and make Ontario whole.

Affordable housing

Ms. Bhutila Karpoche: My question is to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

In response to the lack of affordable housing and ever-increasing rents in Parkdale–High Park, residents have organized, fought back and successfully used rent strikes to stop corporate landlords from gouging them.

One of the buildings that was successful is 1251 King Street West. But now the landlord, Nuspor, has retaliated, issuing an eviction notice to the lead organizer, Mark, his wife, Pratussa, and their newborn son. It is clear to Mark and Pratussa’s neighbours that this eviction is punishment for Mark’s role in the rent strike.

Will this government commit today to implementing real rent control, stopping above-guideline rent increases, creating a rent registry and protecting the rights of tenants like Mark and Pratussa?

Hon. Steve Clark: I want to thank the member for Parkdale–High Park for the question. I want to congratulate her on her election to the assembly. I look forward to working with her.

My ministry has obviously been monitoring the situation in Parkdale–High Park and looking at the situation. Obviously, the Residential Tenancies Act does establish a framework for tenants to be able to provide those comments regarding what a landlord has been doing for them. The framework is very clearly spelled out. Certainly, there are remedies there for the tenant to be able to express some of the things that the landlord has done.

Certainly, since my appointment to cabinet, I’ve heard from both landlords and tenants regarding the situation with the Residential Tenancies Act and the Landlord and Tenant Board. I’d be more than happy in the supplemental to provide more information to the member.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary.

Ms. Bhutila Karpoche: Back to the minister: Parkdale Organize is holding a rally outside the Landlord and Tenant Board on August 1, the same date that Mark and Pratussa will have to appear for a hearing to fight their eviction notice. Residents of Parkdale–High Park will be there to show their support for their neighbours and send a message that they will not be bullied by corporate landlords.

Mr. Speaker, I want to know from this minister: Whose side is the government on? Will they stand with the tenants and introduce legislation to protect them, or will they take the side of corporate landlords?

Hon. Steve Clark: I want to remind that the member that the Residential Tenancies Act establishes the Landlord and Tenant Board, which is an independent tribunal with the authority to resolve those disputes between landlords and tenants.

I want to again remind the member that, under the Residential Tenancies Act, every tenant—I want to stress that—every tenant who faces eviction has the right to that hearing at the Landlord and Tenant Board. The act is very specific in terms of how landlords must act with tenants. It’s an independent tribunal, and it would be inappropriate for me to comment on something that is before the tribunal at this time.

Economic development

Ms. Jill Dunlop: My question is for the Minister of Economic Development, Job Creation and Trade.

We understand the need to create a climate for companies to choose Ontario to invest in. Yesterday afternoon, Amazon made an announcement about bringing jobs and businesses to Ontario. Can the minister please give the House an update on what the announcement was?

Hon. Jim Wilson: I thank the honourable member for the question.

Yesterday was a great day for the people of Ontario. It shows that Ontario sure is open for business. I want to thank Amazon for announcing their one-million-square-foot facility that will create more than 800 full-time jobs for the people of Ontario. We need more companies like Amazon to come to Ontario and bring those new jobs, and that’s what we work on in my ministry. Every ministry has that mandate because it’s a very high priority for the government of Ontario.

I thank Amazon, but I also want to thank our member from Dufferin–Caledon, who played a key role in landing this investment in her riding. So congratulations to her.

We promised the people of Ontario that we would work to make Ontario open for business once again, and we’re doing that by lowering taxes and putting more money in people’s pockets, cleaning up the—

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

Supplementary.

Ms. Jill Dunlop: Thank you—through you, Mr. Speaker—to the minister for that response. I would also like to extend my congratulations to Amazon for their announcement on bringing jobs and business to Ontario.

Will the minister please explain to the House—and, most importantly, to the opposition—why it is so important for Ontario to be open for business?

Hon. Jim Wilson: It’s extremely important—thank you again for the question. It’s obvious, I think, to all of us on this side of the House and, I hope, to everyone, that being open for business is crucial. We need to break down those regulatory barriers that were put up by previous governments, especially the government of the last 15 years—some 360,000 regulations that businesses and individuals have to try and deal with, and some of them are extremely ridiculous. We have them in all of our departments.

We have a deputy minister that has been established to go through those regulations and make recommendations to cabinet and to caucus, and really truly roll out the red carpet so that the hard-working people of Ontario—those million people on social assistance—have an opportunity to have a hand up, to get a job, to put food on the table for their families and not rely on the state, but to contribute to society by paying their taxes and raising their children. That’s what we were elected to do; that’s what we’re going to do, Mr. Speaker.

Automotive industry

Ms. Teresa J. Armstrong: My question is to the Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks.

Of course, when this government cancelled cap-and-trade, it killed a number of green initiatives with it. The green energy car rebate was good for the environment but it was also good for the economy.

Twenty models of electric and hydrogen-fuelled cars qualified for the consumer rebate. Morgan works at the Finch auto dealership in London. He is worried because the abrupt end to the climate change plan through cap-and-trade has meant an abrupt drop-off on sales of eco-friendly, energy-efficient cars.

What do you say to the car companies and car dealers who saw their business increase due to the green energy trades?

Hon. Rod Phillips: Minister of Transportation.

Hon. John Yakabuski: Thank you to the member from London–Fanshawe for the question. Congratulations to her for being re-elected again as well.

Our government ran on a platform, an absolute promise of getting rid of the absolute unfair cap-and-trade tax in this province. As part of that, we also had to eliminate the programs that were being funded by that unfair tax. The electric vehicle program—we made it very clear that that would be one of the programs that would be lost.

But we also were extremely fair in the way that we ended it. On July 11, we announced that until September 10, all dealers and anyone who had purchased a vehicle or had a vehicle on order, as long it was plated and delivered by September 10, other than Tesla—they would receive their rebate.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Ms. Teresa J. Armstrong: Mr. Speaker, these weren’t luxury cars. They were priced within range of a new car, and the rebate was significant for consumers.

Due to the rebate, car manufacturers and retailers saw a 120% increase in sales last year. Green car initiatives have been worth $175 million to the economy since being introduced—good for the environment and good for the economy, Speaker.

What does the minister have to say to car manufacturers—job creators in the province—car dealers and consumers who relied on this rebate program?

Hon. John Yakabuski: Thank you again to the member. A punishing $1.9-billion tax on families is not good for the economy.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Stop the clock. Members will take their seats. Restart the clock.

Hon. John Yakabuski: And $2-a-litre gasoline, as proposed by members of your party, is not good for the economy.

So I say to the member, when we eliminated that unfair tax, we ended the program for rebates that everyone in Ontario was paying for but only some were benefiting from.

Interjections.

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

Hon. John Yakabuski: We were absolutely fair in the way that we brought about an end to the program. People understood during the campaign that this program would end because it was part of our cap-and-trade promise to end it. Promise—

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

New question.

Retirement homes

During the election campaign, I knocked on many doors and heard from many seniors and their families. One question I heard often was, how are seniors who are living in retirement homes protected in Ontario?

Mr. Speaker, through you to the minister, can you please share with us how you and your ministry are protecting our seniors?

Hon. Raymond Sung Joon Cho: Mr. Speaker, through you, I want to thank the member for asking me my first question as a minister.

Mr. Speaker, it’s an honour for me to stand up in this House, especially after being hit by a stroke a couple of days after my election. Somehow our Premier-designate, Doug Ford, found out. Within an hour of my admission to the hospital, the Premier was there to visit me. I want to thank the Premier, and I would like to thank all the members in this House in advance for having to put up with my speech articulation after my stroke.

Mr. Speaker, we want to ensure that seniors in retirement homes all across the province are treated with care and respect. If you operate a retirement home in Ontario, you must be licensed and compliant with the law that protects seniors. Requirements of this law include a duty for—

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

Interjections.

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

Supplementary question.

Mr. Bill Walker: Back to the minister: It’s great to have you here, Minister.

Mr. Speaker, I was fortunate enough to visit a number of retirement homes and their residents over the course of the election. Given that maintaining resident safety is paramount to this government, how many licensed retirement homes are in Ontario, and what is the Retirement Homes Regulatory Authority’s role in ensuring that residents are kept safe?

Hon. Raymond Sung Joon Cho: Mr. Speaker, currently there are over 730 retirement homes licensed in Ontario and subject to care and safety standards.

Mr. Speaker, in

summary, this government is committed to ensuring that retirement homes across the province are safe and secure for all their residents.

Hospital funding

M me France Gélinas: Ma question est pour la première ministre par intérim.

Less than a month after the Premier was sworn in, jobs are being cut at Sudbury hospital. At least 51 hard-working, dedicated health care providers are set to lose their jobs at Health Sciences North. The union president says, and I agree, that these hospital employees are “stressed to the hilt.”

These jobs rest in the Premier’s hands. He has the power to stop those layoffs by funding the hospital enough to have the staff that they need. My question is simple: Will the Deputy Premier stop these job cuts at Health Sciences North in Sudbury?

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

This is a serious issue. I am aware that the Sudbury hospital has had some significant financial difficulties, and so I can assure you that the ministry is well aware of the situation and we are urging the hospital to continue to work with the LHIN to resolve this so that job losses are kept to an absolute minimum.

We know that people need care. We know that they can’t be laying off any more people than necessary. They have already received some money from the ministry: $4.6 million to aid in the financial situation. There is more work to be done. The LHIN is working very carefully with the hospital on this issue.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

M me France Gélinas: Ontario hospitals cannot afford more cuts and more layoffs. They have been cut to the bone by the last Conservative government and by the last Liberal government.

Today, every hospital in northern Ontario is on the brink of financial crisis. In fact, the board chairs of the four biggest hospitals in the northeast penned a letter that says they are struggling to deliver services in “a fiscal environment that threatens basic financial survival.”

The last thing our northern Ontario hospitals need is more cuts, more layoffs and longer wait times for the families in the northeast.

Will the Deputy Premier stop the cuts at Sudbury’s hospital and place a complete moratorium on job cuts in Ontario hospitals?

Hon. Christine Elliott: I would say to the member, through you, Mr. Speaker, that some of the concerns being experienced at the Sudbury hospital and some of the other northern hospitals demonstrate the need for system improvement and accountability after 15 years of lack of improvement and lack of care by the previous Liberal government.

We are committed to improving the situation. That is why we are working very closely, through the ministry and with the LHIN, to deal with the situation right now at Sudbury to make sure that they can become financially viable as soon as possible. That is why $4.8 million—I’m sorry; I’m just changing that number to address the correct number: $4.8 million to improve the situation. There may be more work that needs to be done, but we are dealing with the situation very closely and we will make changes where we have to.

Government contracts

Ms. Catherine Fife: My question is for the Acting Premier.

Last week, the government announced that it had cancelled 758 renewable energy projects. One of those projects was a hydroelectric power plant to be built on the Park Hill Road dam in Cambridge.

The Grand River Conservation Authority has been working for decades to get approvals for the project that would provide nearly 600 homes with cheap and reliable hydroelectricity.

Instead, the contract was cancelled with no notice. That means lost jobs for the people of Waterloo region without taking one cent off of anyone’s hydro bills.

Speaker, what does the government have to say to the 600 families who will now see higher hydro bills because your government scrapped their cheap, reliable and environmentally friendly alternative?

Hon. Christine Elliott: Minister of Energy.

Hon. Greg Rickford: What would I say? Well, three words, but I’ll take my 60 seconds anyway: Help is here. Those people, like all Ontarians, are going to experience $790 million worth of relief from cancelling those projects, most of them that communities didn’t need or want.

We’re committed to cutting hydro rates, not subsidizing them for future generations to take on that burden, Mr. Speaker. This is a promise made and a promise kept for today.

Ms. Catherine Fife: Mr. Speaker, those people that the minister refers to are going to pay higher hydro rates, they’re going to lose their jobs and they’re going to have compromised contracts in the province of Ontario.

The government is getting rid of any renewable energy contract that their insider friends don’t approve of. The Park Hill Road dam would have provided nearly 600 families with cheap, reliable and environmentally friendly hydroelectricity.

Cancelling government contracts in this manner undermines investor confidence. It signals to the business community that the government of Ontario cannot be trusted as a business partner.

Will the government do the right thing and fulfill their contractual obligations for the people in Waterloo region?

Hon. Greg Rickford: What we’re going to do is fulfill our promise, our promise to reduce hydro rates by 12%—to cut them, not subsidize them as this member and her party had supported time and time again when the Liberals were ruining our hydro with the unfair hydro act.

We’re committed to renewing Hydro One’s leadership. We’re committed to getting rid of the carbon tax that’s putting a burden on families and businesses. Ontario is open for business. We’re making one promise after another and keeping one promise after another. Her members are going to feel that relief—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Stop the clock. The members will take their seats. Restart the clock.

Government’s agenda

Mr. Stephen Lecce: My question is for the Minister of Energy, Northern Development and Mines.

This government made a solemn commitment to deliver positive results for the people of this province. In nine short days, we have delivered renewed leadership at Hydro One and the cancellation of bad energy contracts. Promise made—

Interjections: —promise kept.

Mr. Stephen Lecce: We ended the longest strike on campus in the history of this country, at York University. Promise made—

Interjections: —promise kept.

Mr. Stephen Lecce: Yesterday, our new government took decisive action to scrap the punitive cap-and-trade carbon tax.

Mr. Speaker, could the Minister of Energy commit today to another promise made and another promise kept?

Interjections.

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

Minister of Energy.

Hon. Greg Rickford: I thank the member for his thorough understanding of this bill. I want to thank the House leader, the whip and all of our colleagues for chiming in on the debate, as well as the members across the way.

One thing was clear: Ontarians wanted their students to go back to class. Promise made, promise kept.

They wanted to save $790 million instead of wasting it on projects that they didn’t want and they didn’t need. They wanted Hydro One’s leadership to be renewed, and that’s exactly what’s going on. Promise made—

Interjections: —promise kept.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The members will take their seats. Stop the clock. Restart the clock.

Supplementary?

Mr. Stephen Lecce: Back to the Minister of Energy: It is refreshing to finally have a government that actually delivers on their word, that rolls up their sleeves in the service of the people. Mr. Speaker, this is the realization of responsible government. It’s proud to serve with you, sir.

Could the Minister of Energy outline today how our low-tax plan for the economy will help create good, value-added jobs in our economy and create the conditions for prosperity in every region of this province?

Hon. Greg Rickford: I’ve been thinking a lot about that, hearing about the NDP math here. It sounds a lot like it did in Ottawa. Their forestry policy is their fiscal policy; their fiscal policy is their forestry policy. They think money grows on trees.

We know that it comes from Ontario taxpayers, from their pockets. They voted for a government that would reel in wasteful spending. They smelled something fishy about the NDP plan, some $5 billion worth of fishiness in their platform.

We’re going to cast our net wide. We’re going to clean up wasteful spending. We’re going to create prosperity and opportunity for Ontarians from Windsor clear across to the great city of Kenora. Help is here.

Greenhouse gas emissions

Mr. Gilles Bisson: My question, Mr. Speaker, through you, is to the Deputy Premier.

Deputy Premier, we see yet again more backroom deals by the Tories where Doug Ford went out, talked to some big polluters, talked to people who had money, and said, “What kind of deal can I help you with?”

Now we have legislation in place that’s going to allow the largest polluters in this province to get off the hook from taking their responsibility of making sure they are good citizens and they don’t pollute our environment to the degree they are now, and you’re shifting the burden onto individuals.

Deputy Premier, can you tell me why Doug Ford and the Conservatives choose to stand with the big polluters and not with the people of Ontario?

Hon. Christine Elliott: Minister of the Environment.

Hon. Rod Phillips: Mr. Speaker, through you to the member, I appreciate the opportunity to say yet again that the era of the carbon tax in Ontario is over.

Why the members opposite attack employers, why they attack business on one hand and then say they’re in favour of them, I don’t know. Our approach is an approach that’s based on what’s best for Ontario families.

We were elected on a mandate to get rid of the cap-and-trade carbon tax. We will put forward a climate change plan that’s sensible, that understands environmental and economic realities. But the era of the carbon tax in Ontario? It’s over.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Mr. Gilles Bisson: Again to the Deputy Premier: That doesn’t cut it. The reality is, you guys made a choice and your choice was to stand with those big polluters, making sure that you stood with them and you don’t stand with the people of Ontario.

People in this province understand there is a thing called climate change, and we have to do something about it. Instead, you stand with the big polluters by way of backroom deals, and you say, “I choose to stand with th