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

April 2, 2026

44th Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcript 2026-Apr-02 vol. A (PDF)

L059A - Thu 2 Apr 2026 / Jeu 2 avr 2026

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Thursday 2 April 2026 Jeudi 2 avril 2026

Orders of the Day

Plan to Protect Ontario Act (Budget Measures), 2026 / Loi de 2026 sur le plan pour protéger l’Ontario (mesures budgétaires)

Members’ Statements

Sara Tessier

KW Titans orange jersey basketball game

Homelessness

Long-term care

Brad Kovachik

Government investments

Laboratory services

Government investments

Ontario Trillium Foundation grants

Introduction of Visitors

Opposition day motions

Question Period

Nurse practitioners

Education funding

Education funding

Subventions destinées à l’éducation / Education funding

Land use planning

Programmes d’enseignement à l’enfance en difficulté / Special education

Energy rates

Home care

Teachers

Infrastructure renewal

GO Transit

Impaired drivers

Bail reform

Hospital services

Answers to written questions

Notice of dissatisfaction

Legislative pages

Notice of dissatisfaction

Deferred Votes

Mandatory Blood Testing Amendment Act, 2026 / Loi de 2026 modifiant la Loi de 2006 sur le dépistage obligatoire par test sanguin

Plan to Protect Ontario Act (Budget Measures), 2026 / Loi de 2026 sur le plan pour protéger l’Ontario (mesures budgétaires)

Business of the House

Introduction of Visitors

Reports by Committees

Standing Committee on Government Agencies

Petitions

Student assistance

Education funding

Accident benefits

Affordable housing

Health care workers

Social assistance

Student assistance

Student assistance

Social assistance

Student assistance

Health care

Introduction of Government Bills

Better Regional Governance Act, 2026 / Loi de 2026 pour une meilleure gouvernance régionale

Orders of the Day

2026 Ontario budget / Budget de l’Ontario de 2026

Burdett Sisler

2026 Ontario budget / Budget de l’Ontario de 2026

The House met at 0900.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Good morning. Let us pray.

Prières.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): And now a moment of silence for inner thought and personal reflection.

Orders of the Day

Plan to Protect Ontario Act (Budget Measures), 2026 / Loi de 2026 sur le plan pour protéger l’Ontario (mesures budgétaires)

Resuming the debate adjourned on April 1, 2026, on the motion for second reading of the following bill:

Bill 97,

An Act to implement Budget measures, to enact, amend or repeal various statutes and to revoke various regulations / Projet de loi 97, Loi visant à mettre en oeuvre les mesures budgétaires, à édicter, à modifier ou à abroger diverses lois et à abroger divers règlements.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the Minister of Public and Business Service Delivery and Procurement.

Hon. Stephen Crawford: Good morning, Speaker. It’s good to be able to speak about the budget today. As a former parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Finance, I know what’s involved in that, so I want to give a special shout-out to the parliamentary assistants to finance and to the Minister of Finance for working so hard to put this budget together.

I am proud to rise today in support of the 2026 Ontario budget, A Plan to Protect Ontario. At a time of global uncertainty, rising costs and economic pressures, our government is focused on one thing: protecting the people of the province of Ontario—protecting their jobs, protecting their wallets and protecting the services that they rely on every single day.

The reality is, the world has changed. We are seeing tariffs, supply chain disruptions and economic instability ripple across global markets. While we cannot control these forces, we can control how we respond. And our response is clear: We are building the most competitive, resilient and self-reliant economy in the G7. We are lowering costs. We are reducing red tape. And we are making smart, targeted investments that protect Ontario today while setting us up for great, long-term success.

Speaker, this budget is grounded in a simple principle: Be prudent with public dollars, be focused on results and never lose sight of the people we serve. That is why our government continues to take a pragmatic and responsible fiscal approach, making targeted investments while maintaining the flexibility to respond to changing conditions.

While others are raising taxes or cutting services, Ontario is doing the opposite. We are keeping costs down. We are supporting growth. And we are maintaining a clear path to balance the budget. The work of the Ministry of Public and Business Service Delivery and Procurement is central to that plan, because our ministry is about making government work better, faster, more efficiently and more responsively for the people of Ontario.

Let me start with one of the most important priorities of the budget: protecting Ontario workers and businesses. Through the Buy Ontario Act, we are keeping more public dollars here at home, supporting local jobs, strengthening our supply chains and ensuring that Ontario businesses have the opportunity to grow and compete.

This is about economic resilience, and this is about standing up for Ontario workers in the face of global uncertainty.

At the same time, we are breaking down trade barriers within Canada. For too long, internal trade barriers have held back our economy.

That is why Ontario is leading the country in advancing a mutual recognition, making it easier for businesses to operate across provincial borders, reduce costs and unlock new opportunities for growth, because when Ontario businesses succeed, Canada succeeds.

Speaker, we are also taking bold action to cut red tape and make Ontario the best place in Canada and, indeed, the world to do business.

Right now, businesses face fragmented and outdated permitting systems that slow down investment and job creation. We are fixing that by building a new digital permitting system that will simplify approvals, reduce delays and give businesses the certainty they need to invest because we know that time is money, and unnecessary delays cost jobs.

At the same time, we are embracing innovation, and we are doing it responsibly. Artificial intelligence is transforming our economy, and Ontario is leading the way. Through the Enhancing Digital Security and Trust Act, we are putting guardrails in place to ensure AI is used transparently, responsibly and securely. We are protecting privacy, we are strengthening accountability and we are making sure that innovation works for people, not against them.

Speaker, we are also taking decisive action to protect consumers because in today’s economy fairness is not optional; it is expected. Nowhere is that more obvious than the ticket resale market. Families across Ontario have experienced the frustration. They log on early, they wait in line, they do everything right, only to watch tickets disappear in seconds and reappear a moment or two later, sometimes at even four times or five times the price. That’s not a fair marketplace; it is a system that rewards bots and bulk resellers at the expense of everyday people.

We’re going to put a stop to that, Speaker. Our government is introducing changes that would make it illegal to resell tickets for more than the original total cost, including taxes and fees. Our government is introducing changes that would make it illegal to resell tickets for more than the original face value of a ticket—no more hidden markups, no more excessive resale prices, just a fair and transparent system that puts fans first.

Let’s be clear: This is about restoring balance. People should not have to compete with automated systems or professional resellers just to take their family to a concert or a hockey game. This is about access, it is about fairness and it’s about protecting the hard-earned money of the people of Ontario.

At the same time, we will continue to monitor the marketplace very closely. If we see fees or service charges being used to get around these rules, we will not hesitate to act because our focus is very simple: a fair system that works for the people.

Speaker, we are also strengthening consumer protections in other ways, including exploring new rules to protect reward points. Ontarians earn these points through everyday purchases. They are not perks; they represent real value that people rely on. Our goal is to ensure those benefits are protected, accessible and transparent so people can use what they have earned with confidence.

Speaker, we are modernizing how government protects information because trust in government depends on how trust in information is handled. The reality is, our current privacy and access laws are nearly 40 years old. They were written in a different time, before cloud computing, before AI and before the scale and sophistication of today’s cyber threats. They are no longer enough, so we are updating them.

We are strengthening cyber security requirements across the broader public sector, including schools and hospitals; we are improving how personal information is collected, used and protected; and we are putting stronger safeguards in place for children’s data because there is no greater responsibility than protecting young people in the digital world.

We’re also modernizing access processes to ensure that they reflect today’s technology and expectations while continuing to support transparency and accountability because protecting information is not about systems—it is about people, it is about trust and it is about ensuring Ontarians can have full confidence that their data is safe, secure and handled responsibly.

We’re also taking action to combat financial crime. Through work towards a beneficial ownership registry, we are strengthening transparency, law enforcement and ensuring that Ontarians remain safe and competitive doing business here in the province.

Speaker, all this is about one thing: building a stronger, more competitive Ontario. But it is also about delivering services and doing so efficiently. That is why our ministry continues to deliver services in the most cost-effective way possible, ensuring every dollar delivers results and is directed where it matters most. This budget reflects that discipline. My ministry’s expenses are decreasing this year not because we are doing less, but because we are doing more efficiently, delivering better outcomes at a lower cost. That is what responsible government looks like.

This budget is not about short-term fixes; it is about long-term strength. It is about building an economy that can withstand global shocks, an economy that creates jobs and an economy that delivers opportunity for every person in the province.

Let me be clear, Speaker: Our plan is working. Our economy continues to show resilience. We are attracting investment. We are creating jobs. We are maintaining one of the strongest fiscal positions in the country, because we made a choice not to raise taxes, not to cut services, but to grow the economy and support the people who drive it.

At the end of the day, this budget is about people. It is about the worker trying to get ahead, the family trying to make ends meet and the business owner trying to grow. It is about giving them the tools they need to succeed and ensuring Ontario remains the best place to live, work and raise a family. So yes, the world is uncertain, but our plan is clear: We will protect the people of Ontario.

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

MPP Catherine McKenney: Thank you to the minister for your comments.

One of the most alarming things that I see in this budget is a cut to the municipal affairs and housing budget, during a housing crisis on one hand. Giving a one-year HST break will certainly help developers off-load their housing oversupply, but do you agree that cutting housing programs, in particular housing programs that are meant to house people in social housing—we see a growing amount of homelessness. We see a growing number of people sleeping unsheltered. We have organizations that house people and do it well, but this is a cut. Do you agree that this is the time to make that type of—

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Thank you.

Response?

Hon. Stephen Crawford: I appreciate the question from the member from Ottawa Centre. We do certainly agree that there is a housing crisis in Ontario and, indeed, across the country. In fact, quite honestly, in most Western countries there’s a housing crisis right now, for a number of reasons, and it’s certainly been compounded with higher interest rates and some of the affordability issues that we touched on.

We’ve taken very strong measures year over year, in this budget and some legislation, to reduce the cost of housing. The HST cut, getting an agreement with the federal government: We believe a 13% cut—that’s a $130,000 cost savings for someone buying a $1 million new home—is significant, and we believe that will have a very positive impact on the housing market here in Ontario.

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

M me Lucille Collard: Thank you to the member for his speech and his descriptions of what he considers really good measures in there. But I have to say that I can’t fully agree with it because we see in Ontario—everywhere, including in Oakville—the homelessness crisis has increased by 185% since 2018 and the emergency shelters are operating at 140% capacity. I just looked that up, so I’m pretty sure that’s very recent data.

We know that the crisis is created by people having mental health and addiction issues and the lack of affordable housing. Can you point to the measures in this budget that are addressing this crisis?

Hon. Stephen Crawford: To the member: I appreciate the question.

I think we all here in the House agree that the opioid, drug and mental health issues are certainly a crisis, and our government has taken action. The Minister of Health certainly has touched on that. The Associate Minister of Mental Health and Addictions has touched on what we’re doing with respect to the HART hubs that we are putting in across the province, which are more comprehensive in their approach to dealing with people who have drug addiction issues, mental health issues. Rather than just giving them free drugs and keeping the addiction going, we’re taking a more holistic approach to dealing with this very important issue.

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

Mr. Lorne Coe: My question is to the Minister of Public and Business Service Delivery and Procurement.

Our government has been very clear that protecting Ontario means cutting taxes, keeping costs down and standing with the businesses that power our economy.

So I’d like the minister to explain further, beyond his earlier remarks, how this government’s plan, particularly the proposed small business tax cut, is helping protect Ontario small businesses and support job growth in his riding.

Hon. Stephen Crawford: Thank you to the member from Whitby—great question.

We’ve always believed that government does not create wealth and prosperity. Government sets the environment for wealth and prosperity, for companies to flourish, and that’s exactly what we’ve done in the past and will continue to do.

We are the first government in Ontario that has never raised a single tax, and of course we’ve cut taxes, whether it’s the carbon tax or driver’s licence fees, the small business tax, which was in this budget, which is a fairly large reduction, actually—an over 30% reduction in the small business tax.

Small businesses are the backbone of the Ontario economy. Tens of thousands of small businesses in the province create jobs, create great opportunities, create opportunities for summer students, so giving them a break will definitely put them on a better path to withstand some of the turbulence we’re feeling globally right now.

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

M me France Gélinas: I want to ask the member about the changes to the freedom of access to information. I filed a freedom of access to information request to get access to a report that the Minister of Health had on fibromyalgia, myalgic encephalomyelitis and other environmentally linked diseases. The report was never made public, but through freedom of access to information, we were able to get a copy of this report. We were able to share that report so that we now have best practice for plans of care for the people of Ontario, because the freedom of access to information gives us access to a report that only the minister had.

With the changes you’re putting forward, none of that would have been possible; all of the people who suffer with those environmental diseases would not have access to high-quality care. How can you justify that?

Hon. Stephen Crawford: Thank you to the member from Nickel Belt for that question.

I want to make it very clear that 95% of what is accessible now—actually, greater than that—will still be accessible through freedom of information.

Again, it needs to be very clear as well—maybe some of the members of the opposition don’t fully understand—that any direction from ministerial offices to the public service is still open to freedom of information. Anything within the public service is open to freedom of information so that people will be able to access that information.

What we are doing in terms of this legislation is aligning with the majority of jurisdictions in Canada and indeed globally within the Westminster tradition to ensure candid decision-making within cabinet.

All final decision-making, all outcomes, all spending will be fully open and accessible to the public. Nothing is changing with respect to that.

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

M me Dawn Gallagher Murphy: My question is to the minister. First off, I’d like to thank him for all his work in his ministry.

My question is specifically along the lines of artificial intelligence. We know that we have an economy that’s changing. We know workers are having to change what they do to accommodate artificial intelligence. We know that our economy is going to become more dependent on AI.

So, how are we, as a government, helping businesses and workers really look to the future to see how AI can be incorporated? Because it’s going to make our economy one of the most successful in the G7.

Hon. Stephen Crawford: That’s a great question from the member from Newmarket. I wish I had more time to answer that.

Ontario is a leader in artificial intelligence. We’ve got the third-largest tech cluster in North America right here in Ontario. In fact, Ontario was the incubator of AI, right here at the University of Toronto. We’ve got dozens and dozens of great companies, right here. So we do play a major role in it.

Now, having said that, unfortunately, Canada as a country, and Ontario being part of that, we do have a little lower adoption rate than some of our competitors, like the US. We need to make sure that businesses utilize AI more efficiently because there has been a productivity gap between the US and Canada over the last decade, and I believe AI definitely plays a

part in that.

But as a government, here in Ontario, we’re certainly supporting companies that are in the AI space. And as a government, we’ve been expanding within my own ministry to be able to utilize and see how we can use AI more efficiently in government because we believe there are a lot of opportunities within government to be able to use AI and save the taxpayers. In fact, right now, we’re leading Canada in AI usage within the public service.

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

M me France Gélinas: I’m happy to have a few minutes to talk about A Plan to Protect Ontario, the 2026-27 budget. I will go through in the same order as you can find them in the budget.

I’m on page 91. Page 91 says, “Building Highways for Northern Ontario.” I represent a riding in northern Ontario. This is, like, really good news.

Nope, it’s not. We have been waiting for about 40 years for the four-laning of Highway 69. Highway 69 is the highway that goes from the 401 all the way to Sudbury. We still have 68 kilometres of Highway 69 that are two lanes. Today, MPP West and I will be driving home to Sudbury. They’re calling for freezing rain. They’re calling for heavy snow. I guarantee you, on this stretch, there will be—I don’t know—100 trucks that cover your car so that you can’t see anything. They swerve over the middle lane. There is closure of that highway every week in the winter.

I read this in the budget, and I’ll read it to you, Speaker: “Widening Highway 69 from two to four lanes between Parry Sound and Sudbury ... the government is working to complete the remaining 68 kilometres.” No timeline, no money, no commitment, no nothing—they are working to complete the remaining. Will it take another 40 years to complete the 68 kilometres? It could very well be, because that’s all that’s in the budget.

People in northern Ontario need a government who understands that the roads in northern Ontario need to be improved. We cannot continue to have 10 times the amount of risk of death on northern Ontario roads than you have on the 401. This is our lifeline. There is no public transit in Nickel Belt. There are no buses. There is no train. We drive, or we stay home.

When I read things like this in the budget, it makes me feel like we don’t matter. We don’t count. We’re not there. What are you waiting for? Why are there billions of dollars for a fancy tunnel under the 401, but there isn’t even a mention of money allocated to the widening of Highway 69, although it was a promise that this Premier made? While campaigning, he promised to four-lane Highway 69. And then, we get this budget that doesn’t assign a single penny to it, that doesn’t assign a timeline, a work plan—nothing. I’m not happy.

Then, I went on to investing in hospitals. I’ve been the health critic for the last 18 and a half years. I worked in the hospital for 15 years. The hospital that serves most of my community is Health Sciences North, located in Sudbury. Health Sciences North has 526 beds—526 beds. That’s the number of beds at HSN, Health Sciences North. Last night, there were 644 patients. I’ll let you do the math, Speaker. That’s 118 patients that were sick enough to be admitted into a hospital who did not have a bed. They were in hallways, they were in a bathroom, they were in a TV room, in a waiting area. They were anywhere but in a bed in a room.

This is not acceptable, Speaker. This is not acceptable. Our hospital has been in need of an expansion for a very long time, but things move at the rate of a sleepy turtle. They’ve done the work. They’ve submitted the plan. They’ve told the ministry it has been a year and a half, and so far, crickets.

So I read the budget where it said, “Investing in Hospitals,” and Health Sciences North is nowhere to be seen. Health Sciences North is a hub for all of the hospitals in northeastern Ontario. You go anywhere—Espanola, Manitoulin Island, Thessalon, Blind River, Elliot Lake, Sturgeon Falls—they all depend on Health Sciences North. Health Sciences North is a tertiary care centre. There are people from all over northeastern Ontario who come to their cancer treatment centre, who come to their specialized care, which is great. But when you are sick enough to be admitted into a hospital but you’re part of the 118 patients last night who slept anywhere but in a bed, that’s not acceptable.

Their average hallway is 130 patients a night. They do a count every night at midnight, and the average is 130. Last night was a little bit better, at 118. No, it’s still terrible. This has to change, and we don’t see that in the budget.

Hospitals want certainty. They want to know for sure at the beginning of the budget year, which is April 1 to March 31, how much money they’re going to be dealing with. Last year, in December, a couple of months ago, most of the hospitals got bailout money—that’s really good—so that they’re not going to be out hundreds of million of dollars of deficit, but that’s not how you plan health care. The hospital association has come.

They said that they need a minimum of $1.1 billion to keep us at the disastrous level we’re at, but they need $2.2 million to meet the needs and still have hallway health care and still have long wait times and still have Thessalon Hospital, which was closed four days last week, three days the week before. This is not acceptable.

The budget says “up to 4%.” Does that mean you get 1%? Does that mean you get 2%? How can you plan? Hospital associations want a three-year forecast so that they can recruit and retain a stable workforce, form them and supervise them so that we have high-quality care. None of this is possible when it is probably going to be December before they find out what the percentage increase is that they’re getting this year. Is it an ongoing increase or is it just for this year? None of that is clear.

When you keep things like this, people cannot plan. They cannot use their resources to the best ability so that taxpayers get value for their money. Why? Because this government puts numbers out there, but then it takes months and months and months before the hospital actually knows what their budget is going to be.

It is hard to recruit and retain a stable workforce in northern Ontario. We are short over 400 physicians, thousands of nurses, and when you don’t know—they say, “Well, we’ll give you a occasional job, because we don’t know if it’s going to be a contract because we don’t know if we’ll have the money to keep you for next year.” Who wants a job like that? Nobody. It makes it really hard to provide equity care in northern Ontario.

I only have one minute. Man, this goes by really fast, doesn’t it?

Okay, “Supporting High-Quality Long-Term Care”—we got all of a 2% increase in long-term care. The acuity of the people that are in our long-term-care system is continuing to increase. It was back in 2014 that I first tabled a bill asking for four hours of hands-on care, because back in 2014, when I tabled that bill, we had done the study, and the acuity of the people in long-term care needed four hours of hands-on care.

We are in 2026 and we still have not achieved four hours of hands-on care, but the level of needs of the 78,000 people admitted into our long-term-care facilities in Ontario has gone way past what it was in 2014. We are now able to provide a much higher level of care, and that’s great, but that requires resources. And yet we’re getting a 2% increase while the number of beds is going up, while the acuity is going up.

I had a whole lot more to say, but I’m running out of time. Sorry.

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

Ms. Natalie Pierre: To the member opposite, small businesses are the heartbeat of Ontario’s economy, supporting local communities like mine, like Sudbury, and they employ hundreds of thousands of Ontarians across the province.

Included in this budget, our government is proposing lowering the small business corporate income tax rate by over 30% from 3.2% to 2.2%, delivering over a billion dollars in tax relief to more than 375,000 small businesses across the province of Ontario. In other jurisdictions across Canada, they are raising taxes, recording record deficits, cutting jobs. Our government is choosing affordability, competitiveness and private sector job creation.

Through you, Madam Speaker, I ask the member opposite, do they support the historic small business tax credit, and how would that help small business owners in your—

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Thank you.

Response?

M me France Gélinas: To give small businesses a 1% decrease in taxes is something that we support—no problem with that. But small businesses have come and they’ve told you that they need so much more. The people who work in small businesses would like to have sick days. Those workers deserve sick days, but there’s a good chance they won’t have them.

We just had a press conference on Monday that a lot of those small businesses in my riding—I have many industrial parks that support the mining sector—a lot of those small businesses would be glad that we had anti-scab legislation so that, when those workers go on strike or are locked out, we don’t destroy our community, we don’t take advantage of vulnerable workers.

There’s so much more that could be done to support our small businesses, but 1% is one tiny step in the right direction.

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

MPP Jamie West: Thank you to my colleague from Nickel Belt. She talked about Highway 69 and the broken promises the Premier has made. In 2018, 2022, 2025 and every year during the budget, we ask about Highway 69, and the Premier and the Minister of Transportation always promise the cheque is in the mail.

I want to tell you about, in 2025—you read this article, I know, because we talked about it during the drive—the Premier said:

“‘I want to make sure our highways are safe. It’s treacherous and not just here,’ Ford said. ‘Have you ever (gone) from Sudbury down to the city? That two-lane is like white-knuckle driving down there. If the transport is off by two inches and you’re done....

“‘We drove all over the north during the election and snow was coming down. We had a pretty heavy winter. It was terrifying. But until you see it first-hand, you can’t appreciate it. We’ll do everything we can to be sure we get that fulfilled....’”

My question is, why do you think the Premier keeps breaking his promise?

M me France Gélinas: I represent a northern riding with 33 small communities. What I hear from my constituents is that they don’t care—they don’t care about the people of northern Ontario.

I have more mines in my riding than in any other riding. They’re interested in the minerals that we have in Nickel Belt. They’re interested in the mines that we have, but they’re not interested in the people who live there. Things as easy as making—we need access to schools for our kids, to homes to live in, to health care services just like everybody else. But no; they want the resources that come from the ground in Nickel Belt, but they don’t care about the people of Nickel Belt. They don’t care about the people of northern Ontario. If they did, they would have four-laned Highway 69 in 2018 when they said they would.

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

Mr. Lorne Coe: Thank you, Speaker, and through you: My question focuses on community safety because it is not optional, as you know, and it’s absolutely fundamental. It’s why our government is investing in this budget concrete measures, again, to protect hard-working families and neighbourhoods—I’m sure including some of the neighbourhoods in Nickel Belt. Since 2018 alone, $375 million has been allocated to combat guns and gangs.

So I’m interested in hearing, through the member from Nickel Belt, will she support a budget that protects the hard-working families in her community and keeps them safe?

M me France Gélinas: Do the people of Nickel Belt need protection? Absolutely. We have Highway 144 that starts in Sudbury, that goes to Timmins. There is no police whatsoever. We had an OPP detachment in Gogama. You closed it. We had an OPP detachment in Foleyet. You closed it. If you have an accident on Highway 144, if you’re lucky enough to have cell service or somebody goes to somebody’s house to call, it will be hours before a police officer is there to help you.

The money you’ve invested probably helped keep people in southern Ontario safe. For northern Ontario, you took the resources that were in the OPP stations in northern Ontario, and they’re not there anymore. The amount of resources to keep us safe is going down, not up. We kept the OPP station open in Noëlville because we screamed loud enough that you couldn’t do it behind our backs. But Gogama is gone, Foleyet is gone, and we see it in intimate partner violence, in car accidents. We need protection, too—

Interjection.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Stop the clock.

The Associate Minister for Forestry and Forest Products will withdraw his unparliamentary remark. I will wait.

Hon. Kevin Holland: Withdraw.

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

MPP Jamie West: As the member for Nickel Belt knows, my wife works in a kindergarten class. I want to summarize a couple of statements and ask you a question:

“As a wish list, I’d like to come to my place of work 21 days out of the year.”

“I’d like a Ferris wheel, a second Ferris wheel.”

“I would like a secret superhero tunnel like batman has.”

“I’d like a private luxury spa.”

“Instead of fixing the roof of the science centre, I’d like to build a new science centre.”

“Instead of building a place, I want to build a secret island”—even though Lake Ontario is over 86 metres deep on average.

My question to you: Are these the wish lists of one of the kids in my wife’s kindergarten class, or are these the wish lists of the Premier?

M me France Gélinas: That was funny. None of that is the wish list of anybody but the Premier. The Premier uses resources for a Ferris wheel, for fantasy tunnels, for all sorts of things that are not a priority for anybody.

What I hear from people on the front lines is that we want more support for our kids who have special needs. We want them to be able to go to school and achieve their full potential. We want smaller class sizes so that there aren’t 35 kids and one teacher in one room. We want our schools to be there to support each and every one of the students because this is what makes Ontario strong. It is our health care, it is our education system, and for the francophones, if we don’t have French schools, we lose our French really quickly.

So, no, that’s the fantasy of the Ford government, not of the people.

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

Ms. Peggy Sattler: One of the concerns that I hear about a lot from people in London West is the amount of money that they have to pay out of pocket to access health care services. I just did a health care survey of residents in London West, and this was one of the top concerns that they mentioned.

So my question to the member is whether there is anything in this budget that would help clamp down on the number of times that people have to use their credit card to access health care services in the province of Ontario.

M me France Gélinas: The answer to your question is a capital no. There’s actually more money in this budget to expand private, for-profit health care, not to guarantee that people won’t have to pay. What’s happening in your riding is happening everywhere.

Just look at cataract surgery. If you have cataract surgery done in the hospital, everything is free. If you have the same patient and the same ophthalmologist do the same procedures in a private clinic, I guarantee you it will be hundreds if not thousands of dollars in extra fees. When people complain—if they know how to complain, because it’s not easy—some of them will get their money back, but the other hundred that were billed the exact same thing do not.

The government underfunds our publicly delivered health care system for one reason. It’s to push forward their privatization agenda. There is a lot of money to be made off the backs of sick people, and rich corporations know this, especially US corporations.

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

M me Lucille Collard: It’s a pleasure to rise and speak to the budget. There’s always a lot to say about the budget because, at the end of the day, we know that the budget is about choices. It’s about the priorities of the government in that particular year.

Despite the title of this budget that says it wants to protect Ontario, that’s actually not—we see in the budget when we look at the measures that are put forward to presumably try to help Ontarians get by—so we’re not just talking about numbers. Again, it’s a reflection of our priorities, the values that we hold dear and whether a government understands or not the lived reality of the people it actually serves.

When I look at the budget again, I see a government that is out of step with that reality because what I see is that it doesn’t reflect the priorities that I hear about day in and day out in my riding of Ottawa–Vanier. In communities like Ottawa–Vanier and everywhere else, people don’t want slogans; they are asking for support. I mean real supports, supports directly helping people, to help people live with dignity at every stage of their lives and for everyone, regardless of their income. We don’t see that in the budget.

Madam Speaker, the cost of living continues to rise, especially with housing. In Ottawa–Vanier, families are struggling to keep up with rent increases. Young people can’t afford to move out, and I have an example at home. I have four kids. My son of 24 years old is actually moving out this year. He’s 24 years old. I’d like to think that he stuck around because of my good cooking, but I know he was tired of listening to his mom and dad and his siblings.

He’s able to move out, but only just because now he has a girlfriend that he can share the rent with, and he also works two jobs. I think that if the situation would have been different, if affordable housing was available, he probably would have made his way out earlier. That’s not to say that I’m not happy that he’s stuck around for that long. He’s a strong young man, and he’s been a great help at home.

I also have my mother, actually, who has been living at home with me. For the last 18 years, my mom has been with us, helping us—and also, one of the reasons for that is that she couldn’t afford to live in Ottawa on her own. So there is a big household of seven people. We make it work. But not everybody has that opportunity, and unfortunately, a lot of people live in precarious situations. Because what we see is that more and more residents are being pushed into that precarious housing or even out of housing altogether, which is a really bad situation for anyone.

But the data is clear: If we look at the numbers, the median rent in Ottawa has increased by over 60% in the last decade, reaching around $1,600 per month. I think that’s a conservative number. The wait-list for affordable housing has grown to over 15,000 households with wait times stretching up to 7.6 years.

So what we are seeing is the consequences of that every day is that we see encampments. We see them everywhere in Ontario. They’re hidden, but sometimes they’re in plain sight as well. We see shelters that are operating beyond capacity—and those shelter models, really? They should disappear altogether, to be replaced by supportive housing, because they don’t provide a dignified lifestyle. It’s really degrading, and I see it all the time because there is a big concentration of shelters in Ottawa–Vanier and it’s nothing somebody should dream of living in. Because that’s what it has become.

People don’t go in shelters anymore as a transition. They end up spending not only weeks, but months, and in some cases, years, in shelters—imagine.

What we also see is the growing pressure on community organizations that are really, really doing their best to try to get ahead and try to help people on the street. But really, they’re not getting the financial support that they need. Honestly, this budget fails to meaningfully invest in deeply affordable housing and supportive housing, the very solutions municipalities and service providers have been calling for for a very long time. Instead, the government continues to focus on supply targets without addressing affordability. But, Madam Speaker, if people cannot afford the homes they build, then they’re not solving the crisis.

I want to talk a little bit more about homelessness and community services, because in my riding, it’s a big issue. And I know you hear me here talk about this a lot. In Ottawa–Vanier, I also see the human side of the crisis every day. I’m going to name some organizations in my riding, like Ottawa Inner City Health, Sandy Hill Community Health Centre, the Ottawa Mission and Shepherds of Good Hope. They are doing extraordinary work.

Community groups like SOS Vanier street outreach are stepping up every day. Imagine: A group of neighbours figured that they felt like they needed to do something. They got together, and they collect just normal supplies—clothing and juice and food. They go out every night, and they go meet people on the street to give them some supplies, just to help them get through the day and have a little bit of a better day.

These organizations are being asked to do more and more with limited and uncertain resources. Because the crisis is growing; it’s not going backwards. We have nearly 85,000 Ontarians that are experiencing homelessness. That’s an increase of 50% since 2021, just four years ago. In Ottawa alone, close to 3,000 people are experiencing homelessness with hundreds living unsheltered.

This budget does not match the scale of this crisis. Actually, it falls very short. When we fail to invest in housing, mental health and addiction services, what we do is we shift the burden. We shift the burden onto emergency rooms. We shift the burden onto police services and community organizations already stretched to their limit.

Madame la Présidente, la réalité est simple. La crise de l’itinérance et du logement n’est pas une fatalité. C’est le résultat de choix politiques.

À Ottawa–Vanier, nous voyons des organismes communautaires qui font un travail exceptionnel, mais honnêtement, ils sont à bout de souffle. Pendant ce temps, les besoins augmentent, les listes d’attente s’allongent et trop de gens tombent entre les mailles du filet. Investir dans le logement abordable, dans la santé mentale et dans les services en dépendance, ce n’est pas une dépense, c’est une responsabilité comme gouvernement. Et surtout, c’est une question de dignité humaine.

Madam Speaker, access to health care remains one of the top concerns in my riding. Too many people in Ottawa–Vanier still do not have access to a family doctor. Community health centres are overwhelmed, and mental health and addiction services are underfunded. And yet, this budget does not deliver the urgent structural investment needed to stabilize the system. We cannot continue to rely on patchwork solutions while the system is under strain because when people cannot access care, conditions worsen, costs increase and the entire system becomes less efficient.

The same disconnect exists in education. I got into politics because of education, because as a mother of four, I thought, “Gosh, our education system has to be able to be better.” I saw the potential, but what I saw instead were portables where my kids were going to school. They had classes in portables. We were in Ontario; I couldn’t believe it. So I decided to get involved, and that’s how I eventually ended up here to talk about education—but there’s so much more to talk about.

But right now, what we’re dealing with in schools is overcrowded classrooms, increasing student needs and insufficient supports. Teachers are exhausted, students are struggling and, yet, instead of meaningful investments, this budget offers limited, one-off measures that do not address the systemic challenges. The $750 gift card that some of the teachers are getting is not going to cut it to help with the struggles with our education system.

If we’re serious about preparing the next generation, we must invest in the conditions that allow students and educators to succeed. We need good, modern infrastructure—not ruins—and special education supports. Those are two areas that are really needing support.

Madam Speaker, I see that I’m getting to the end. Ontario is a wealthy province, and I think we can do better. We can do better with housing. We can do better with health care. We can do better with education and the support that our communities need.

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

Mr. Lorne Coe: I thank the member from Ottawa–Vanier for her presentation.

Across Ontario, including Ottawa–Vanier, families want assurance that their loved ones will have access to safe, modern and reliable long-term care closer to home, and built to meet growing demands. The member from Ottawa–Vanier will know that this budget continues to affect the building of long-term-care beds across the province. Sadly, her party built only 600 beds over 15 years.

Will the member, when it comes time to vote, stand up in her place and support more long-term-care beds in Ottawa–Vanier?

M me Lucille Collard: I thank the member from Whitby for his question.

Of course, long-term-care facilities are very important. I have to say, I had the Minister of Long-Term Care come to my riding, and she has come to visit some of those long-term-care facilities with me, so she’s well aware that those places are not places where people dream of going.

What I wish I could see in this budget and as a government priority is more investment in home care, because people like my mother, who is 82 years old—she doesn’t want to go to any long-term-care facility. She wishes to stay at home for as long as possible, but she will need the support to be able to do that. So long-term care is fine when you don’t have a choice, but they’re not staffed properly, staff are not treated properly. That’s why we’re having a challenge of retaining those people and that’s what we need to address.

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

Ms. Sandy Shaw: Thank you for your speech this morning.

I share your concerns with public education. I have put my kids through the public system, and I have eight grandchildren right now in the public system. With this government’s continued underfunding, underspending and cuts to education, we’re seeing more and more crowded classrooms.

The Hamilton district school board just announced that, because of these budget cuts, they’re going to have to fire 120 teachers, including 55 elementary school teachers. Like you, we’re receiving hundreds and hundreds of petitions from parents saying we need to reduce class sizes, not squeeze more and more students into larger sizes. So, you know, I share your disappointment.

Can you just say, why do you think the government doesn’t think that young people in our province deserve more than this?

M me Lucille Collard: Thank you to the member for her question. Obviously, education is a big passion of mine. Like I said, that’s the reason I got into politics. And after six years of being an MPP and 10 years of being a school trustee, I’m still disappointed with our system. I ran into a parent that had her kids in the same school my kids were in and she said, “My youngest daughter doesn’t want to go to school anymore. There’s 29 people in her classroom and half of them have special needs. There’s no support, so she’s totally lost motivation to go to school.” And that’s the last thing we want to see.

That’s why we need to create those good conditions, so that kids are motivated to go to school and receive the quality education that they deserve.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): Time for a quick question.

Mr. Rudy Cuzzetto: I was listening to the member from Ottawa–Vanier talking about how when she was a trustee 10 years before—she was elected in 2020 in a by-election—and she was saying how terrible the education system was back then. I’m not sure if the member remembers that it was a Liberal government that was in power at that time.

Can you elaborate on how bad it was under the Liberal government, the education system in Ontario?

M me Lucille Collard: I’m here to tell you one thing: It wasn’t as bad as it is right now.

Interjection.

M me Lucille Collard: Well, you asked for it. That’s my experience. I was 10 years a trustee. There was some support coming in from the Liberal government. I’m not saying it was perfect. I think our education system has fallen behind for way too many years.

Really, it’s the fault of every government for not prioritizing education more, all the governments. But definitely, after eight years of this government, we haven’t seen a dent in the quality of education in the right direction. So, no, I don’t need to say more.

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

Hon. Steve Clark: Good morning, everyone. I want to first thank the people of Leeds–Grenville–Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes for the opportunity to provide some perspective on our government’s budget bill, Bill 97.

First of all, I want to thank the efforts of our finance minister, the Honourable Peter Bethlenfalvy, and the team in the Ministry of Finance behind him. I want to thank his two parliamentary assistants, the member for Eglinton–Lawrence and the member for Peterborough–Kawartha, for all their work that they have done. This is an incredible amount of work that took place, lots of public hearings by the minister and the parliamentary assistants in addition to the all-party standing committee. It really takes a united front to uphold the economy. More than that, it takes an ambitious, progressive government to grow our economy beyond what it is today.

Speaker, let me tell the House this one piece at the start of my address: We need to secure the future of Ontario’s economy and we need to invest in it now. That is exactly what our 2026 budget, A Plan to Protect Ontario, is designed to do. It makes targeted investments to protect workers, to protect businesses, to keep costs down for families, to strengthen public services and to build a stronger, more competitive Ontario.

In my riding, in the municipality of North Grenville and Kemptville, Ontario’s government has approved the Conseil des écoles catholiques du Centre-Est to tender a new école élémentaire et secondaire catholique Notre-Dame.

Speaker, je suis très fier des investissements de ce gouvernement dans cette nouvelle école. Lorsque la construction de l’école sera terminée, la nouvelle école élémentaire et secondaire catholique Notre-Dame permettra à 417 élèves de bénéficier d’un environnement d’apprentissage moderne et entièrement équipé. Ce sont 417 élèves qui pourront atteindre leur plein potentiel, tisser des liens durables et s’épanouir dans ce nouvel environnement que nous avons construit de A à Z, grâce à un investissement provincial de 26,5 millions de dollars. Et ce n’est pas tout. Le projet offre également 49 nouvelles places en garderie pour les familles de la région.

Située à North Grenville, cette école n’est pas simplement une étape dans l’atteinte des objectifs de construction, c’est une avancée dans le développement de l’éducation. Ces investissements sont un effort essentiel pour mettre en valeur les élèves francophones de mon comté et pour assurer que leur éducation soit durable et protégée, comme partout ailleurs en Ontario.

I take a great pride in the francophone population of Leeds and Grenville. Investments in French education are not isolated to my riding—far from it.

Looking to our budget, I want to highlight another investment: a net new investment of over $5 million to develop learning resources to help reflect Ontario’s proud dedication to francophone culture. That $5 million will be allocated to reading supports, online courses, mental health services and many, many more resources that raise our students for future prosperity.

Our investments in education don’t stop there. Like I said before, investments in the schools—and I’m hoping this year, we might actually have a record in my riding, although the announcements around the budget haven’t been made in every riding. But I’ve got some very good projects, and it could be for the first time in the history of Leeds–Grenville–Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes I might have all four boards with a new construction project in my riding. That’s really, really special, for young people to have a state-of-the-art facility in their community.

I also want to talk about our government in terms of the Classroom Supplies Fund for elementary school homeroom teachers. I have already seen emails from teachers thanking us. This allows them to access $750 to supply their classrooms with essentials for our student needs.

I want to thank those teachers who have taken the time to email me to thank us for putting that money in their hands. Because some of them have expressed that, in the past, maybe the principal might have received the money but not provided it to them. I want to thank them for emailing me about that. It’s a $66-million investment and I think it’s an investment that’s well spent.

Building off last year’s Supporting Children and Students Act, this budget holds its objective strong. Every dollar invested has been invested for the betterment of student success, and student success is our province’s success.

The education sector is not alone in this budget’s mission to improve Ontario. Our government is continually investing in the welfare of our province’s communities. Because populations are growing, which is indisputable, those communities need to be supported. And beyond schools, I think we’ve achieved a great opportunity to support our communities with the Community Sport and Recreation Infrastructure Fund. So Minister Lumsden, I want to thank you for that announcement; I want to thank you for that investment in the budget.

I know communities in my riding of Leeds–Grenville–Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes appreciate the additional $300 million over six years. They’re going to help meet the needs of our growing communities to repair facilities, to establish new recreation facilities and, altogether, the investments raise that total program funding to about $500 million. That’s $500 million dedicated to our children, adults and our growing communities. Thank you so much, Minister.

As well, this week I was able to make some announcements regarding arts culture funding for both the Thousand Islands Playhouse and the St. Lawrence Shakespeare Festival. I want to thank the Ontario Arts Council, which is an agency of the government of Ontario, for that investment. It was roughly $264,000.

But I want to take the few precious minutes I have to talk about two things. I want to talk about our investment in corrections. I want to thank the minister for the investment at the Brockville community correctional complex, we’re going to house 295 inmates; the St. Lawrence valley treatment centre, another 25 female beds, expanding their secure treatment unit. Brockville jail is the oldest operating jail in Ontario. I feel—and I’ve told Minister Kerzner this, told the Premier this, when they were in my riding—after 184 years, it’s time to invest in that facility. I’m glad that it’s part of our plan to keep Ontario safe.

The final thing I want to mention in the last minute of play, is the HST rebate. I was at an event for the Ontario Federation of Agriculture on Saturday. I had Mayor Roger Haley show me an actual down payment that was made because of that grant. So I know, in my own riding, that we are literally—people are buying new homes because of this grant.

Speaker, we’ve debated this matter at length. I ask you, respectfully, that I move that the question now be put.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): There having been more than nine hours and one minute of debate and 26 members having participated, Mr. Clark has moved that the question be now put. I am satisfied there has been sufficient debate to allow this question to be put to the House.

It is the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? I heard a no.

All those in favour of the motion that the question be now put, please say “aye.”

All opposed to the motion that the question be now put say “nay.”

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

A recorded vote being required, it will be deferred to the next instance of deferred votes.

Vote deferred.

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

Hon. Steve Clark: No further business at this time, Speaker.

The Acting Speaker (Ms. Jennifer K. French): In that case, this House stands in recess until 10:15.

The House recessed from 1008 to 1015.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): You may be seated. Good morning, everyone.

Members’ Statements

Sara Tessier

MPP Mohamed Firin: I rise today to recognize Sara A. Tessier, impact director for formerly incarcerated persons at the Northpine Foundation, whose work is transforming lives across Canada. Sara’s work aligns closely with priorities to build safer communities by supporting evidence-based rehabilitation initiatives that reduce long-term system pressures and improve outcomes for individuals and families across Canada.

With nearly a decade of experience, Sara has dedicated her career to supporting some of the most marginalized individuals in our society—those who are victimized, criminalized and often left behind. Drawing from lived experiences, Sara has worked with organizations such as the Elizabeth Fry Society, John Howard Society and Coverdale Courtwork Society to support individuals transitioning out of incarceration and to reduce recidivism.

Through the initiatives and the investments that Sara led, thousands of individuals have gained access to stable housing, education and employment. The broader impact is equally significant as a $30-million investment in these programs over four years has saved the taxpayers over a billion dollars. In recognition of this leadership and impact, Sara was awarded the King Charles III Coronation Medal in 2025.

Beyond program delivery, Sara has played a key role in advancing policy and advocacy, including providing testimony to Senate committees and supporting legislative discussions on the rights and rehabilitation of incarcerated individuals.

Madam Speaker, Sara’s work is a powerful reminder that when we invest in people, we create safer communities, stronger systems and real second chances. Sara is here with us today. I would appreciate if the members can kindly welcome her with me.

Applause.

KW Titans orange jersey basketball game

Ms. Catherine Fife: On Saturday, I had the pleasure of attending the first ever KW Titans’s orange jersey basketball game. This was not just an event but a moment of learning, healing and truth in action.

I was able to meet Phyllis Webstad, a beautiful and courageous woman and the founder of Orange Shirt Day. At six years old, on her first day at St. Joseph’s Mission Residential School, Phyllis was stripped of her clothes, including a new orange shirt from her grandmother. It was never returned. That shirt is a symbol of the efforts made by residential schools to erase Indigenous children’s identity.

Canada’s last residential school closed just 30 years ago. Thousands of families were torn apart, which resulted in generational trauma.

My friend and colleague the member from Kiiwetinoong is the only residential school survivor to serve in Ontario’s Legislature. His experience is echoed by every Indigenous person who survived these horrific institutions. As a Canadian, I am proud of our ability to face difficult historical truths and say, “Never again.” That begins by remembering our collective past.

I want to thank Sheena Merling and her team for organizing Saturday’s event and to the Titans’s owners, David and Kate Schooley, for understanding the value of this kind of leadership. Sheena pointed out that this game showed what community can look like when we lead with heart.

Finally, a heartfelt gratitude to Phyllis Webstad for courageously sharing your story so that we can all learn together.

Homelessness

M me Lucille Collard: The homelessness crisis we are seeing today is not accidental. It is a result of underinvestment in housing, mental health and addiction services. In a province as wealthy as Ontario, it is unacceptable that people are losing their dignity simply because the support they need is not there.

In my riding of Ottawa–Vanier, I see the extraordinary work being done every day by organizations like Ottawa Inner City Health, Sandy Hill Community Health Centre, the Ottawa Mission and Shepherds of Good Hope, as well as community groups like SOS Vanier street outreach.

To the front-line workers and volunteers, thank you. You meet people where they are, and you bring compassion and hope into incredibly difficult situations, because the people living on our streets are not a problem to be managed; they are human beings who deserve dignity. And it should be a wake-up call for everyone here that naloxone advocates need to come to Queen’s Park to ask for this life-saving medicine to be more widely available to address the crisis.

I know residents are feeling the strain of this crisis, but the solution is not to look away or rely on enforcement alone. The solution is to invest in supportive housing, in mental health care and in addictions services. Ontario has the capacity to lead. I urge the government to show the courage to act.

Long-term care

Mr. David Smith: I rise today to recognize long-term care in our province of Ontario.

Over the winter break, I had an opportunity to visit several long-term-care facilities in my riding of Scarborough Centre, such as Wexford, Bendale Acres, Kennedy Lodge and Alexis Lodge. These facilities are doing an exceptionally great job taking care of our seniors in our community, building a vibrant, caring community for seniors.

As a result of that, I would like to recognize the minister for the great work that she’s doing all across Ontario in providing the care and the understanding of our administrators, nurses and PSWs. Recently, I visited long-term-care homes to interact with directors, PSWs and nurses. Therefore, I believe that our government, under the leadership of Premier Ford, is doing a great job in taking care of our seniors. They rightfully deserve all the treatment that they should have.

My profound gratitude goes out to every PSW, nurse, administrative staff and every working person in the field of long-term care in my riding. I would like to express my strong dedication for all the work—

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Members’ statements?

Brad Kovachik

MPP Wayne Gates: Speaker, I rise to honour a special community member in the town of Fort Erie. His name is Brad Kovachik. If you played hockey in Niagara at any point, you probably know Brad. He’s been a pillar to families and young players in Fort Erie for many years. He’s given back. He’s a coach to young people in Fort Erie. He’s a leader in our community on the minor hockey board. But he’s also been a linesman in the National Hockey League for over 30 years. He’s now retiring.

His last game was two days ago when he refereed the Florida Panthers and the Ottawa Senators in Florida—Florida unfortunately won the game 6-3. It was a nice moment when all the players from both teams came together at centre ice to congratulate him for his amazing career. Brad’s entire family and his close friends were at the game to share a special moment one last time.

Brad has worked an impressive five Stanley Cups. That’s 1,974 games over three decades—more games if you include international play, like the 2014 Winter Olympics in Russia.

Fort Erie and Niagara are proud and privileged to have a community member like Brad help and grow the game we all love. Join me in honouring Brad in the Legislature on an amazing career and a wonderful retirement.

I’d also like to say—Brad wanted me to say this. He wanted me to congratulate the Fort Erie Meteors, who tied their semifinal junior league playoffs at 2-2 with St. Catharines.

Brad, enjoy your retirement.

Government investments

Mr. Anthony Leardi: I have more great news from the county of Essex, this time from the town of Amherstburg, which is my hometown. Amherstburg has 700 acres of industrially zoned land. It is called the Howard Avenue industrial park, and our government has a plan. It’s called the Trade-Impacted Communities Program, and under this program, the town of Amherstburg will be receiving $838,000 to help plan the Howard Avenue industrial park.

We will be doing environmental assessments, land use planning and market analysis. The Howard Avenue industrial park is strategically located within a 10-minute radius of the Gordie Howe bridge, of Highway 401 and Highway 3. Madam Speaker, we are a strategically located location in the province of Ontario.

I want to thank the Minister of Economic Development, Job Creation and Trade for the Trade Impacted-Communities Program, and state that, under the leadership of Premier Ford, we are protecting jobs, we are protecting Ontario and we are building for the future.

Laboratory services

M me France Gélinas: I am so proud of the people of Sudbury, Nickel Belt and northeastern Ontario. In December, thanks to a whistle-blower, we learned that Quest Diagnostics, a private, for-profit American company, wanted to increase their profit by closing the Sudbury lab testing and transporting the lab samples to Toronto.

Transporting time-sensitive medical samples on Highway 69, on winter roads leads to delays and less accurate tests, which impacts patient care.

People were shocked. They were frightened. Municipal, provincial and federal offices were flooded with messages from concerned citizens. Over 10,000 people signed the petition that the MPP from Sudbury and I put together, calling on the minister to overturn this decision. We want the minister to tell us what is in this contract and how we can change it.

Make no mistake, Speaker: If this was happening in reverse, if Quest Diagnostics was closing resources in Toronto to bring them to the north, I have no doubt that the Premier and the minister would look at the contract and change things.

We are moving forward. Quest Diagnostics, LifeLabs, the minister—they are feeling the pressure. But we can’t give up. We need to stand shoulder to shoulder and raise our voices together. We need to continue to stand up and be counted—more letters, more phone calls, more petitions, more demonstrations. This is how we will win. This is how we will protect health care services in Sudbury and northern Ontario.

Government investments

Mrs. Daisy Wai: Today, I rise to celebrate the incredible work our government is doing in my riding of Richmond Hill. As hard-working families continue to face the challenges of tariffs and economic uncertainty, our government has continued uplifting our community.

This year alone, Richmond Hill has received millions of dollars in provincial funding to weather the storm of tariffs and keep our residents healthy, safe and self-sufficient.

Our government is ensuring firefighters have the supplies they need to save lives, with a grant of over $100,000.

We’re investing over $1 million to keep municipal water infrastructure safe for future generations.

We’re supporting Mackenzie Health hospital with millions of dollars in funding so patients can access quality care close to home—and they have access to CT scans a lot more.

And we’re uplifting local businesses so that they can keep driving our economy forward, with the recent announcement in the budget that reduces taxes from 3.2% to 2.2%—that makes the biggest difference for them.

Now, more than ever, Richmond Hill is so thankful for this ongoing support. I’ve heard it loud and clear: These projects are making everyday life better and more affordable for our residents.

Ontario Trillium Foundation grants

Mr. Lorne Coe: Through the Ontario Trillium Foundation Grow program, our government is investing over $1 million this year to support two non-profit organizations in Whitby and one in Ajax. These include Big Brothers Big Sisters of South Durham and Northumberland, the Alzheimer Society of Durham Region and the Sunrise Developmental Support Services group. These organizations are pillars of our Durham communities, and this support will enable them to improve programs that are essential to the well-being of residents, making a lasting impact for years to come.

Melanie Stewart, who’s the executive director of Big Brothers Big Sisters of South Durham and Northumberland, had this to say about the new funding: “This funding will allow us to adapt our group mentorship program for young women ages 11 to 14, to better address the challenges they are facing today, online safety, bullying and mental health. We are thankful to the Ontario Trillium Foundation for standing alongside us as a committed partner in supporting girls’ mental health, safety and empowerment in our community.”

Introduction of Visitors

Mr. Robert Bailey: Thank you for the opportunity today to introduce a long-time friend and colleague, Monte McNaughton, and his wife, Kate Bartz, in the Speaker’s gallery today. They’re here to acknowledge and honour their daughter Annie, who is a page here today. She’s a page captain, and she’s here today, and they’re here to witness that.

I’d also like to add that Monte being a former colleague as well—he was also a page some 35 years ago in this chamber.

Anyway, congratulations.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Monte, just so you know, Bob and I wrestled for that introduction in the lobby, and he won.

Introduction of visitors.

Hon. Graydon Smith: I’d like to welcome the family of one of our page captains today, Marigold Mason, whose family made the trip down from Huntsville. Welcome to her parents, Heather Mason and Patrick Mason, and her sister, Cecily Mason.

Have a great day here at Queen’s Park.

MPP Paul Vickers: I’d like to introduce Mike Engelhardt today from my riding. He is also the father of Else. Else has done a great job. She has shown what good spirit is, and hard work and determination.

Hon. Jill Dunlop: I’d like to welcome a good friend of mine to the House today: Mehdi Shafiei. Welcome to Queen’s Park, and enjoy your day.

Hon. Vijay Thanigasalam: I’d like to welcome Dvorah Richler, Danielle Portnik, Justine Yim, Erica Louttit, Jennifer Sevigny and Yelena Rogan from Emergent BioSolutions, champions for Narcan. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Hon. Nolan Quinn: I would like to welcome Dr. Asima Vezina, president and vice-chancellor of International Business University, as well as Dr. Feridun Hamdullahpur, chancellor of IBU, as well as Mr. Nevzat Gurmen, VP of strategy and growth at IBU.

Hon. Stephen Crawford: I’d like to welcome Yong Jiang from my riding of Oakville—he’s here with some guests from Halton—and Jeffrey Dunham. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

MPP Stephanie Smyth: I’d love to introduce today a constituent of mine, and you might have heard of him: John Moore from Newstalk 1010.

Welcome to your House.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): And no, John, you cannot have the tricorne hat. It stays in the building.

I recognize the member for Lanark–Frontenac–Kingston.

Mr. John Jordan: I want to welcome my lifetime friend and best man at my wedding, Chris Flood.

Hon. Stephen Lecce: I want to introduce a long-time friend, Antonio Ienco, who’s the director of sponsorship and events and the founder of the Vaughan International Film Festival.

Opposition day motions

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Two notices of opposition day motions were tabled yesterday for consideration the week of April 13, 2026. I’m therefore required to decide which motion will be debated pursuant to standing order 45(d).

As it stands, the official opposition and the third party each have two remaining opportunities to file notice of an opposition day. Last week, I selected the motion standing in the name of the leader of the official opposition for debate, and the third party’s notice was removed from the Orders and Notices paper. I believe it is fair for the third party to have its turn as well, and I am selecting the notice of motion standing in the name of the member from Nepean to be debated the week following the constituency week.

Please note, since this is already the second time this issue has come up this meeting period, I would urge the official opposition and third party to work with each other to avoid tabling competing notices. I hope that this will not be a regular occurrence throughout the rest of the meeting period. I thank you for your attention.

It is now time for question period.

Question Period

Nurse practitioners

Ms. Marit Stiles: My question is for the Premier. Premier, your Minister of Health has failed Ontarians. She has failed to comply with the Canada Health Act. She missed the deadline to deliver nurse practitioner-led primary care, and the most she can do, apparently, is shrug her shoulders. The minister admitted that she has no plan or any timeline to bring nurse practitioners into publicly funded primary care. This is going to mean less money for health care from the federal government and more money going out of peoples’ pockets in the province of Ontario.

How much money is being left on the table, and what is it going to cost patients?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): The Minister of Health.

Hon. Sylvia Jones: Respectfully, perhaps the member opposite hasn’t actually read the letter. I have made it very clear that Ontario will be in compliance, even though the federal government has given no funding and has given no direction, so we are going to see different processes in all of the Canadian jurisdictions. Now, Ontario will lead. We will continue to lead, and we will make sure that we are in compliance because we are already doing that.

We have over 170 additional seats as a result of the work of the Minister of Colleges and Universities to train nurse practitioners in the province of Ontario. Why? Because we see the value in a publicly funded system that includes hospitals, that includes primary care, that includes home and community care. We’re doing that work. We’ve made a commitment to nurse practitioners to be part of a publicly funded system.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the Leader of the Opposition.

Ms. Marit Stiles: Speaker, I don’t know whether this government just has no idea what people are experiencing in northern and rural and so many other parts of Ontario—either that or they just don’t care. When there’s no family doctor in a community, it is nurse practitioners and it is nurse practitioner-led clinics who pick up the slack. But because they’re not funded by your government, it is actually rural residents, northerners and people all across this province that are paying out of pocket for primary care. Also, we are losing nurse practitioners in this province.

How much longer are northern and rural patients going to have to pay for primary care with their credit card?

Hon. Sylvia Jones: I’m not sure that the member opposite is actually following the enhancements and the expansions of our primary care clinicians. We have nurse practitioner-led clinics that we didn’t have a year ago in Ottawa, in Cambridge, in Minto-Mapleton. We are enhancing primary care clinicians, and we absolutely are funding nurse practitioner-led clinics. We’re also making sure that those nurse practitioners work in multi-disciplinary teams where physicians work with nurse practitioners, work with dietitians, work with mental health workers.

When we make sure that interprofessional clinicians work together, we have better patient outcomes and we have clinicians who are working together. That is the goal, and that’s what $3.4 billion in primary care expansion is giving us in the province of Ontario.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the Leader of the Opposition.

Ms. Marit Stiles: As long as people in Ontario have to pay with their credit card to get primary care, you are failing the people of Ontario. Meanwhile, in other provinces, patients can go see a nurse practitioner for primary care, and they don’t have to pay with a credit card; they don’t have to pay out of pocket. But here in Ontario, we have seniors lining up in our emergency rooms to fill their prescriptions because they can’t get primary care.

There are two and a half million people in Ontario who still cannot access a family doctor or get primary care. You know, nurse practitioners are more than ready to fill the gap, but they need this government to step up and fund their services.

You have no plan, you have no timeline, and there’s no action from this government. Why are you denying the people access to primary care?

Hon. Sylvia Jones: Do you know why nurse practitioners are ready to provide those services? Because we’ve expanded their scope of practice. We are committed to ensuring that primary care is part of nurse practitioners, and nurse practitioners are in primary care. Tell that to the 330,000 people who have a primary care clinician today that didn’t have one less than a year ago.

We are making the investments. We are having people step up to ensure that those individuals have access to a primary care provider that absolutely include world-class trained nurse practitioners in the province of Ontario.

Education funding

Ms. Marit Stiles: My question is to the Premier. Just yesterday, we learned that the government’s cuts to education funding mean that 40 more vice-principals are going to be fired in the Toronto District School Board. This is going to mean kids getting less attention, less supervision, less support. It means parents get fewer updates, less predictability, more phone calls in the middle of the day telling them to come pick up their kid. This means teachers have fewer resources, fewer options, more stress. These are the choices that this government is making.

So to the Premier: Why is this government firing these vital workers, these vice-principals, who keep our schools running?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): The Minister of Education.

Hon. Paul Calandra: As you know, Madam Speaker, the board made the decision to reduce the amount of vice-principals for two reasons. First, there are 5,000 fewer students, approximately, that will be attending the Toronto District School Board come September, which requires fewer vice-principals in the system. Also, the previous board of trustees had decided to continue a program that was no longer funded. Of course, that program was additional supports during COVID, a time when there needed to be some additional supports in our schools. They chose to continue on that program that was no longer funded.

The fact that COVID is now behind us and the fact that enrolment has decreased by over 5,000 students in the Toronto District School Board means that the board does not require these extra vice-principals.

There are no students that will go without proper supervision. In fact, the investments that we’re making in our schools mean that there will be better outcomes for our kids. We’re focused on students, parents and teachers and student achievement across not only Toronto, but across all of Ontario.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Supplementary?

Ms. Marit Stiles: I think this Premier and this Minister of Education need to get into a classroom and actually talk to kids and families, who are still struggling so much.

You know, this is this Minister of Education’s hand-picked supervisor who’s making this decision.

Why is it that the government has the money to pay 124 Metrolinx executive vice-presidents, but when it comes to our schools, there is no money for them to even have a vice-principal? Why is that? There’s money for a broke luxury spa company, but no money for our kids.

The Premier’s approach to education is a disaster, and it is Ontario’s children that are being left behind. Will the Premier get up today and commit to ending these education cuts?

Hon. Paul Calandra: Look, Madam Speaker, I’ve said it on a number of occasions: The reality is, of course, that the budget puts additional resources into education.

But honestly, I don’t think parents care about what the Leader of the Opposition says or what the Minister of Education says. You know what they care about? Are their kids succeeding? Are they getting the best out of a $43-billion Ministry of Education budget? That is what I’m going to continue to focus on.

Now, she talks about going into classrooms. I have been all across the province of Ontario, speaking to teachers directly. They continue to tell me, “Put the focus back on students.” A lot of teachers have said to me, “I don’t want to be a parent. I want to be an educator. Give me what I need so that we can succeed.”

That is why we announced, in this budget, 750 additional dollars for homeroom teachers across the province on top of the other resources that we’re giving for classroom education, so that teachers could make decisions for themselves as to what they need to help students succeed in their classrooms.

The results are the highest levels in literacy scores across the province of Ontario—

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Final supplementary?

Ms. Marit Stiles: So $750 cards—are you going to buy a vice-principal with that? No, you’re not.

You know what parents care about? They care that they can get on the phone when their kid is falling behind and find somebody to talk to. Now they’re going to have no vice-principal. They care that the teachers are overwhelmed and burning out. We can’t recruit principals into our system right now because they are so overworked and burned out.

Parents know what this means. It means fewer resources in their classrooms. It means fewer caring adults in their schools. There is money for a broke luxury spa company in downtown Toronto, there is money for 124 executive vice-presidents at Metrolinx, but you can’t fund a vice-principal in a school.

What is wrong with this government that you cannot get your priorities straight?

Hon. Paul Calandra: I guess that’s quite interesting. I know my colleagues will probably agree with me, because I know a lot of my colleagues have been in schools across the province of Ontario helping teachers understand that they’re getting an extra $750 per homeroom to buy the types of things that they need—pencils, papers—on top of what we’re already providing to our schools.

So now you’ve heard it, colleagues: The Leader of the Opposition wants to rip that money out of the classroom, right? Because that’s what the NDP is all about. It’s not about the classroom. It is not about achievement. It’s about them and what they think is best.

So you go to the schools—I’ll come with you—and you tell teachers that you no longer want them to have access to that $750.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Through the Speaker.

Hon. Paul Calandra: You tell teachers that what they’re doing isn’t enough—because do you know what I think, Madam Speaker? Our teachers are the lifeblood of the education system. Our teachers work hard every single day to give our students the best opportunity to succeed, and I won’t listen to the Leader of the Opposition. What I will do is plow more money back into the classrooms and less into administration.

Education funding

Mr. John Fraser: My question is for the Minister of Education. After eight long years, this Ford government is tired, out of touch and out of ideas. Their latest budget tells that story, because there’s nothing in that budget for families and their budgets.

You know, Speaker, families depend on great schools. But right now, their schools aren’t safe places to learn or to work. That’s because class sizes are too big; they’ve grown. That’s because special education has been starved, and there’s a mental health crisis in our schools that’s not being addressed.

My question is simple: Why is the Minister of Education cutting funding to our kids’ schools?

Hon. Paul Calandra: In fact, the leader of the third party would know that we’re doing no such thing. The only person that is advocating for less resources in our schools is actually the opposition, because they will have an opportunity in this budget to vote for additional resources for schools. They’ll have an opportunity in this budget to support the highest level of education funding in the province’s history. They will have an opportunity in this budget to vote in favour of additional supports for math.

They’ll have an opportunity in this budget to confirm that they believe that teachers are the lifeblood of the education system and they deserve more money to make choices on their own of how they can best support their students. They’ll have that opportunity. They’ll have the opportunity to vote in favour of billions of dollars’ worth of capital improvements across the system.

I ask the member opposite: Will he do the right thing and vote in favour of teachers? Will he vote in favour of students? Will he vote in favour of parents? Because what we’re seeing is the highest graduation rates in the history of the province, literacy scores at the highest they’ve ever been, and after 15 long years of Liberals, who failed our students, we’re going in the right direction, and we won’t look back.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the leader of the third party.

Mr. John Fraser: The minister spent three months looking at EQAO results, and, obviously, he probably needs some help in reading and help in math, because if you go to page 185 of the 2025 budget and then go to page 192 of the 2026 budget, you’ll notice that it’s $170 million less. Even by Conservative math, that’s a cut. So we know that boards are having to find $800 million a year just to fund special education and they’re not meeting the need.

Last week, I told a story about Marigold, a six-year-old girl who’s been waiting two years to get the help that she needs. My colleague from Orléans told a story about Juliet, who was thriving one year and the next year she got nothing.

So, Speaker, why is there nothing in this budget to help children like Marigold and Juliet get the help that they deserve?

Hon. Paul Calandra: Again, Madam Speaker, we’re at the highest level of education spending in the province’s history, but it’s of no consequence unless you start to see the results of those investments.

The member talks about the EQAO results. I love to talk about the EQAO results. You know why? Because when I look at it, I see literacy scores at the highest level in the province’s history.

Now, unlike the Liberals, colleagues—you will all remember this. You remember discovery math, right? Nobody could understand discovery math. Under Liberals, literacy scores plummeted. Under Liberals, math scores plummeted. Under Liberals, graduation rates were lower.

Under Conservatives, literacy scores: the highest ever. Graduation rates: the highest ever. Math scores: starting to increase. But you know what? Conservatives aren’t happy with where they are. That’s why we’re doubling down, putting more investments in it, because we want our students to have the exact same success as they’re having in literacy. We will get the job done, unlike the failed Liberal Party who failed students, parents and teachers every day.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the leader of the third party.

Mr. John Fraser: Speaker, children like Marigold and Juliet are not just bums in seats. They’re not just heads to be counted. It’s critical for their development as a child that they get the help that they need. Right now, in nine boards, there’s no one left to call.

Speaker, what do you do when your child needs a speech pathologist? I guess—

Interjections: Better call Paul.

Mr. John Fraser: Speaker, what do you do as a parent when your child needs help with reading?

Interjections: Better call Paul.

Mr. John Fraser: And what do you do when you need an EA for your child because they need educational support?

Interjections: Better call Paul.

Mr. John Fraser: So in nine boards: Who does the minister think parents should call?

Hon. Paul Calandra: Just when you thought the Liberals could not get more pathetic you see that. My God. No wonder he’s the leader of the Liberal Party for the third time, the third-time leader of the Liberal Party. That’s right.

You know who parents, teachers and students want to call? They call the Progressive Conservative government when they have been left in shambles by a previous Liberal government. That’s who they’re going to call.

But the funny thing is that, in those boards where we have supervision, we also have student and family offices. In Ottawa, in his board, you know what’s happening—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): The member for Don Valley North will come to order.

Hon. Paul Calandra: —family helpline are responded to within two days, and 88% of the problems that they raise are addressed within five days. The results are even better in Toronto. But ultimately, what matters is that students, parents and teachers have better outcomes, and they know that when Conservatives are in charge, the outcomes are better. When Liberals are in charge, you can discover things but never—

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Question?

Subventions destinées à l’éducation / Education funding

M me Lucille Collard: Après huit ans de ce gouvernement, la vie est plus difficile pour nos éducateurs et nos éducatrices, qui sont épuisés, démoralisés et vraiment à bout de souffle. Les classes débordent, la violence en milieu scolaire augmente et trop d’élèves perdent l’intérêt d’aller à l’école.

Pourtant, dans son budget, le gouvernement n’offre aucun investissement significatif pour répondre à ces défis parce qu’il est clairement déconnecté de la réalité. À la place, ce qu’il propose, c’est une carte-cadeau de 750 $ pour certains enseignants du primaire.

Est-ce vraiment la valeur que le gouvernement accorde à l’éducation de nos enfants?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): The Minister of Education.

Hon. Paul Calandra: Now I’ve actually heard it all. I’ve actually heard it all. The Liberals now, with the NDP, are saying that the additional resources that we’re giving directly to teachers—an extra $750—the translation came across to me as a “gift card.” The Liberals are now claiming that teachers who get additional resources to help students in their classrooms, that’s a gift card, a nice-to-have. But under 15 years of Liberals, they starved our teachers, forcing them to go to Dollarama, forcing them to buy resources on their own.

We’ve said, “Enough. That’s enough.” We want to support our homeroom teachers. It’s not a gift card. It’s not a “nice-to-have.” Our teachers have told us that it is a must-have. That is why, under Conservatives, you’re seeing things like literacy rates, the highest levels ever, and graduation rates, the highest levels ever.

And do you know what? We aren’t satisfied with just meeting the averages; we want to go above and beyond. We will not stop until our kids have the best opportunity—

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the member for Ottawa–Vanier.

M me Lucille Collard: Yes, it is a must-have, because they should never have had to pay for that kind of stuff in the first place. So thanks for fixing that, eight years later.

Our education system depends on qualified, supported teachers. But more and more, we see these valued teachers leaving the profession within the first five years. In the francophone system, the unresolved teacher shortage crisis is increasing the pressure in the classroom—classrooms that are overcrowded, with too many kids with special needs that are not met and increased violence among children and against teachers.

How does the minister expect the next generation to choose teaching when these are the working conditions they are walking into?

Hon. Paul Calandra: That is why we are making so many changes across the system. It’s not just about what the member raises, right? That is why, when we decided to reverse the decisions of the previous Liberal governments to remove community resource officers or take police out of our schools, we said that’s no longer good enough. We saw what happened when that decision was made—an ideological decision by the Liberals. We’re bringing our police back into our schools to make them safer.

But you know what? It’s not just about that either. They let schools crumble. How do you turn to an education professional and say, “Go teach in a school that is old and outdated?” I have had to take over a school board in the Near North District School Board that allowed their kids to be taught in a half-demolished high school. That’s the legacy of the Liberal government.

So it’s not good enough for us. And we are going to step in, put things back on track when they fall off the rails.

Interjection.

Hon. Paul Calandra: The three-time leader of the opposition says, “Oh, it’s been eight years”—eight years where we fought a pandemic and came out stronger than anybody before, eight years where we’re struggling with tariffs. Ontario’s on—

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the member for Ottawa–Vanier.

M me Lucille Collard: Speaker, not only are teachers exhausted, our school infrastructure is too—and I think you’ve just pointed to crumbling infrastructure, so what have you done after eight years?

In my riding of Ottawa–Vanier, Manor Park Public School was ranked in the top 10 in Ontario in a recent report by the Canadian Environmental Law Association—guess what—for exceeding provincial limits for lead in water. While it might be okay to have politicians work in a building with contaminated water, no one here and no parent in Ontario should be comfortable exposing our children to this.

What is the minister’s plan to protect the health of our kids from lead exposure, unless government considers that there is a level of contamination that is acceptable for children in Ontario schools?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): The Minister of the Environment.

Hon. Todd J. McCarthy: We are proud of the fact, under our government’s watch, that Ontario’s drinking water is among the safest and most well protected in the world. Our comprehensive legislation and our strong monitoring, reporting and enforcement systems ensure that our drinking water is always held to Ontario’s high safety standards.

Now, when it comes to protecting our children in schools, those strong standards are applied across the board in every way. We have the testing, the monitoring, and in those rare occasions when there is any issue whatsoever, strong, decisive action is taken.

Land use planning

MPP Alexa Gilmour: Speaker, there are some things that our government is meant to guard, not gamble with: our farmlands, our food supply, our jobs and the infrastructure that holds this province together.

The Ontario Food Terminal is one of those things. It moves over two billion pounds of produce a year, connects 400 farmers with over 5,000 buyers, supports more than 100,000 jobs, many of them from my riding. And now, the land beside this vital food hub, along with three other Toronto employment lands, are under threat of rezoning. And once those employment lands are gone, Speaker, they are gone for good.

Speaker, will this government act now to protect the employment lands we all depend on?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the Minister of Agriculture.

Hon. Trevor Jones: I thank the member across the aisle for the question, because it’s a critical piece of infrastructure that I acknowledge, and I invite you to be there sometime with us to see the investments we’re doing.

We’re working closely with the board, with the vendors. We’ve been there many times. We’ve got our staff there to engage with the vendors, to hear the success stories of the people that started selling vegetables to our independent network of grocers coast to coast. There’s fresh fruit and vegetables and food products that start in Ontario. They go to Gander, Newfoundland, and Richmond, British Columbia, and everywhere in between. We support that wholeheartedly, working closely with our ministry colleagues to make sure we protect that resource, that crown jewel in our network.

I invite the member to join me sometime there to engage with the vendors, with the board and the people there who are protecting our food supply and protecting Ontario just as we are.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I’ll remind members to direct their questions and responses through the Chair.

I recognize the member for Parkdale–High Park.

MPP Alexa Gilmour: Speaker, I appreciate the member’s answer. It’s wonderful that the member visits.

I asked him what he’s going to do to protect it now that it’s under threat, because farmers rise before dawn for this place. Truck drivers, warehouse workers, small grocers, restaurant owners, school nutrition programs and food banks all depend on it. The produce from the Ontario Food Terminal supports nine provinces in this country.

At this moment in time when families are skipping groceries, when workers are anxious, when food security is sacred and should be treated in such a way, this government is failing. It’s failing to safeguard the one greatest pillar of our food system.

So I want to ask the Premier, will he save the Ontario Food Terminal, or has he already made a backroom deal to sell it?

Hon. Trevor Jones: Once again, I thank the member for shining a spotlight on our food producers, our farmers and our food terminal. The short answer to that question is yes, we’re protecting Ontario’s food supply, we’re protecting Ontario’s farmers and we’re protecting our crown jewel, which is the Ontario Food Terminal.

To complement that, let’s highlight the work we’re doing through the food terminal to benefit all of Ontario. That’s a component of the $52 billion—the biggest part of our GDP, our economic pie, is food production, agri-business. One in nine jobs, including mine, is because of food producers and agricultural producers.

That terminal is going to stay. We’re protecting it. I’ll be there, and I’ll stand behind those words. I will stand beside my Premier, our cabinet and our caucus to protect Ontario’s food supply and protect that terminal.

Programmes d’enseignement à l’enfance en difficulté / Special education

Après huit ans de ce gouvernement conservateur, pourquoi les familles d’Ottawa doivent-elles toujours lutter juste pour obtenir le soutien d’éducation spécialisée promis à leurs enfants?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): The Minister of Education.

Hon. Paul Calandra: I’ll repeat it again. I’ve said it a number of times. Look, we’re at the highest level of education spending in the province’s history, but I think what’s really important is the results that come out of an education system. We saw for 15 years the Liberals really weren’t focused on results. They were focused on ideology, and they never put students, parents or teachers first.

We’re doing the exact opposite. Look, just today we’ve learned that the Liberals and NDP will tear apart the agreement that we have in place to get $750 back into classroom spending, that they would cancel that program. That is very disappointing. I’m sure that teachers across the province who are depending on this in September are disappointed to learn that both the Liberals and NDP think that it’s a nice-to-have and not a must-have.

Look, we’re going to double down. We’re going to continue to support students, parents and teachers. We’re going to refocus the education system away from politics and back on results and student achievement. We will not be moved off track on that vital mission, and we’re seeing results: highest literacy rates, highest graduation rates, math scores going in the right direction. But we want better, and that’s why we’re doubling down. This budget puts more resources into getting that job done.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the member for Orléans.

Mr. Stephen Blais: Madam Speaker, parents are being told that their child qualifies for support, that they need an educational assistant, a psychologist, speech therapist—some form of specialized programming—then they are told that none is available.

The minister blames school boards, but school boards cannot hire the staff they need if this minister does not provide the funding that is adequate. Kids like Juliet, like Marigold, like tens of thousands of others across Ontario need this help to thrive and to pursue their dreams.

After eight long years of Conservative government, when will this minister stop passing the buck and finally fund special education properly?

Hon. Paul Calandra: I don’t think anybody can accuse me of passing the buck, Madam Speaker. You can say a lot of things about me, but I don’t think right now you can say that. In fact, in an earlier question they were complaining that I’ve taken over too many school boards and taken over too much responsibility.

Well, you know what? The only people that actually passed the buck were the Liberals for 15 long years. When math scores were plummeting, what did the Liberals do? Nothing. When literacy scores were plummeting, what did they do? Nothing. When conflict within our schools increased, what did they do? Nothing. When our schools were crumbling, what did they do? They closed them as opposed to fixing them and building new ones.

You know what we’re going to do? We’re going to continue to show leadership across the province of Ontario. The ministry is going to continue to show leadership, and I’m going to focus on what matters: student achievement. I’ll let them focus on administration. I’ll focus on students, parents and teachers, and I’ll get the job done, along with my colleagues.

Energy rates

Mr. Matthew Rae: Time to get this question period back on track.

My question is to the Minister of Energy and Mines. Families in my riding of Perth–Wellington and across Ontario continue to feel the pressure of affordability. They expect their governments to take real action to lower the cost of living, especially when it comes to their energy bills.

Our government has taken comprehensive approaches, and we’re delivering immediate relief to those who need it most, while also helping families reduce their energy use through practical upgrades and conservation programs.

Speaker, can the minister outline how our government is helping Ontario families save on their energy bills today, and how these programs are delivering measurable results across Perth–Wellington and Ontario?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the member for Scarborough Centre.

Mr. David Smith: I’d like to thank the member from Perth–Wellington.

Our approach is simple: Don’t make life more expensive. We are focused on keeping costs down and putting money back in people’s pockets.

The previous Liberal government drove up hydro bills with bad contracts. We are doing the opposite; we are protecting affordability.

While the opposition supported policies that made life more expensive for drivers, our government is doing the opposite. We are cutting costs, including the provincial gas tax by five cents per litre.

We are also helping people save at home through the Home Renovation Savings Program, covering up to 30% of energy upgrades, including insulation and efficient appliances.

We are also making smart, targeted investments in the energy system to ensure we have the reliable, affordable power needed to supply—

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Question?

Mr. Matthew Rae: While immediate relief and helping families lower their monthly bills is critical, Ontarians also want confidence that their energy system will remain stable, reliable and affordable for decades to come.

We know that demand for electricity is expected to grow significantly across our province as it continues to expand, with more homes being built, more industries coming online and increased electrification across our economy.

At the same time, families cannot afford to see the return of the kinds of skyrocketing hydro bills that we saw under the previous Liberal government.

Can the parliamentary assistant please explain to this place how our government is planning for long-term growth and ensuring Ontario has the reliable, affordable energy it needs to support that growth while protecting ratepayers from future cost increases?

Mr. David Smith: Keeping energy affordable means planning for the long term, not just for today. That starts with prioritizing nuclear energy, a made-in-Canada solution that provides consistent, affordable power. Nuclear facilities operate over 90% of the time—60 to 80 years—avoiding the need for repeated reinvestment in shorter-lived generation sources.

Replacing long-term, reliable generation with intermittent sources would require more infrastructure, more land, more cost—and costs get passed on to our families.

And in doing so, we are strengthening the Canadian supply chain, supporting good-paying jobs and positioning Ontario as a global leader in clean, reliable energy, Madam Speaker.

Home care

Ms. Chandra Pasma: In January, John Lacombe died all alone in his apartment in Ottawa. His body wasn’t found for seven days. John should have been receiving daily visits from home care, but Ontario Health atHome closed his file, saying they couldn’t contact him to make arrangements despite the fact that they had been told he couldn’t answer the phone because of his condition. The system completely failed John, and it failed his family.

What will the Premier do to ensure that no other patient falls through the gaps of our broken home care system?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I recognize the Minister of Health.

Hon. Sylvia Jones: The situation that the member opposite highlights is obviously under active investigation—it was immediately when Ontario Health atHome realized what had happened—so I cannot speak specifically to that individual case.

What I can tell you is, under the strong, new leadership at Ontario Health atHome, we are making great progress to make sure that those individual organizations that are providing this critical service across Ontario not only have the investments and the money to provide that, but also making sure that the oversight piece is there.

Because we want to make sure that when people leave hospitals, they have access to home care. We know that it is a very positive outcome when people have the appropriate services in their homes and in their communities. We will continue to work with Ontario Health atHome to ensure that that oversight happens.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the member for Ottawa West–Nepean.

Ms. Chandra Pasma: Speaker, Ontario Health atHome didn’t even start investigating for two months, until John’s sister contacted a reporter. John’s sister, Norine Gagnon, repeatedly asked for help for her brother. She told Ontario Health atHome that John could not answer his phone. She asked them to knock on his door; they did not. They called her to say they were discharging him without ever having checked on him or done anything more than make a few phone calls.

Despite all of his sister’s advocacy, John died alone. How many tragedies like John’s do we need before this government will act?

Hon. Sylvia Jones: As I said, Speaker, we cannot comment on an ongoing investigation that is currently happening with that individual situation.

But I also think it’s important to remind the member that we are making those investments because we know that individuals who are getting home care in their communities, in their homes, have better outcomes. We know that as we expand hospital-to-home programs, where hospitals work directly with service provider organizations, the outcomes for patients and their families improve.

Look, I wish I could speak more to an individual situation, but the truth is, that would not be fair to the patient, to the family or the ongoing investigation. What I can tell you is, as we continue to expand programs like hospital to home, as we continue to expand community paramedicine programs, we are seeing outcomes that patients want to have availability to, and clinicians know that it is an improved outcome.

Teachers

Mr. John Fraser: To the Minister of Education: Yesterday, more than 100 students in the Minister of Transportation’s riding walked out of school to protest the firing of their favourite teachers. They’re part of the more than 300 teachers in Peel who are on the chopping block.

And don’t take it from me; take it from Arshiya Ohri, a grade 12 student organizer at Brampton Centennial. Here’s what she had to say: “I was pretty angry about it. These people are more than just numbers. They’re beloved teachers within the school.”

Madam Speaker, Brampton students shouldn’t have to hold up signs that say, “Hands off our education” or “Protect our teachers.” Can the Minister of Education tell these students why they’re doing a better job of protecting their schools than he is?

Hon. Paul Calandra: The member opposite will know the reason I assumed responsibility for supervision of the Peel board was because they actually wanted to fire teachers in February, pull them out of the classroom and give students a new teacher in the middle of the year. I don’t know about the Liberals, but I don’t think that is in the best interests of students. I don’t think it’s in the best interests of parents, and it’s certainly not in the best interests of our teachers. Consistency in the classroom throughout the school year I think is very, very important, and that’s in part why I stepped in.

Now, as we looked a little bit further into Peel, there were so many different challenges there that the previous school board was not addressing. Of course, there were challenges with respect to the numbers that were starting to decrease. A lot of parents were choosing to take their kids out of the Peel system and for other opportunities. That is something that we are addressing.

These notices that are going out now are part of a yearly challenge that happens across school boards in Ontario when they look at the numbers that they’re expecting in September and they match that with the amount of teachers they’ll need in the next school year.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the leader of the third party.

Mr. John Fraser: Respectfully, I think we need more “we” than “I” when we’re talking about education.

Madam Speaker, let’s talk about another Brampton school that has more than 1,700 students; they’re letting 18 teachers go. In Mississauga, West Credit, a school with a high population of special-needs students, is losing eight teachers that students rely on. At a time when we know class sizes are too big, special education is being starved and the mental health crisis in our schools is not being addressed, this minister is firing teachers.

Speaker, Brampton, if I can recall, I think has three cabinet ministers, but if you had a kid in one of these schools, you’d never know it. Can the members across the aisle, or the minister, tell us what they’re doing to protect the schools or the kids in Brampton?

Hon. Paul Calandra: The leader of the Liberal Party, colleagues—let’s hear what he says. They want to take $750 out of the classroom. He just said there’s not enough “we” and too much “I.” Well, for 15 years, the Liberals were all about “we” and not about “I,” and who is the “I”? The “I” is the student. The “I” is the teacher. The “I” is the parent. That’s who the “I” is, and that is who this entire caucus fights for. It fights for the teachers, the students and the parents, because you know what happens when you do? You put more resources into the classroom. You give our students the opportunity to succeed. Under Liberals, all of the results were crashing—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): The leader of the third party will come to order.

Hon. Paul Calandra: Under Conservatives, we’re starting to see the highest education supports ever, the highest budget for education—

Interjections.

Hon. Paul Calandra: You gotta love the Liberals. You hear? I wish the people at home could hear the Liberal leader right now. I wish they could hear him right now. He’s sour. He’s sour because you know what he knows? Parents, students and teachers support what we’re doing.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Order. We are not in school. Order.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Order.

I recognize the member for Algoma–Manitoulin.

Infrastructure renewal

MPP Bill Rosenberg: My question is for the acting Minister of Infrastructure. In my riding of Algoma–Manitoulin and across northern Ontario, I continue to hear the same message from families, businesses and local leaders: People want more housing so communities can grow, young people can stay and new opportunities can take root.

For years, communities in the north were working with decades-old water systems that the previous Liberal government allowed to decline, ultimately limiting capacity and holding back growth.

Our government is changing that. Speaker, can the acting minister please share how our government is helping northern municipalities repair and upgrade our water systems that make housing possible?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): The interim Minister of Infrastructure.

Hon. Todd J. McCarthy: I thank the excellent member from Algoma–Manitoulin for that thoughtful question. He’s now in his second year in office, having won victory in the election of 2025, and he’s an excellent member of Treasury Board as a parliamentary assistant there.

Under the previous Liberal government, we had an infrastructure deficit, as you know. Our government is taking a different approach. Under the Premier’s leadership, we are protecting Ontario by investing in the core infrastructure that families and businesses rely on every day. So far, MHIP, the Municipal Housing Infrastructure Program, has invested $3 billion across Ontario and $2.8 billion through OCIF, the Ontario Community Infrastructure Fund. As a result, communities are now seeing record investments in their local infrastructure—new and existing—to upgrade that and protect it. This means expanded, upgraded and more reliable water systems all throughout the north.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the member from Algoma–Manitoulin.

MPP Bill Rosenberg: Thank you to the acting Minister of Infrastructure for that thoughtful response.

Speaker, families in rural and northern communities want to see real action to address the challenges that have delayed housing for far too long. They need clean water and reliable infrastructure not only to support growing communities but to help get homes built faster and keep costs down for families. Unlike the past Liberal government, which left communities struggling with aging assets, we are focused on delivering results.

Through you, Speaker, to the acting minister: Can he share what dedicated supports our government is providing to ensure rural and northern communities are no longer left behind?

Hon. Todd J. McCarthy: Another thoughtful and timely question from the member.

Under the leadership of Premier Ford and our government, communities across northern Ontario have received more than $745 million in recent infrastructure funding. That’s to support water treatment upgrades in Cochrane, housing-enabling water system improvements in Sudbury and a new pump station and expanded water distribution in the member’s riding of Algoma–Manitoulin.

These record investments reflect our Ontario government’s long-term planning. Through these programs, we have helped unlock 800,000 new homes, and 375,000 existing homes are supported. We are proud to stand with the north and we keep doing the work that’s required to remove barriers that have held the north back for so long—the north that was rejected and disrespected by the former Liberal government propped up by the NDP.

GO Transit

Mrs. Jennifer (Jennie) Stevens: This question is to the Premier. The government’s recent budget talks about improved GO train service to Niagara, but once again fails to provide any clear timeline. Residents in St. Catharines have been calling for two-way, all-day GO services for years to access jobs in the GTA, reduce congestion on the QEW and connect Ontarians to one of the largest tourism hubs in all of North America. After years of promises, Niagara is still waiting at the platform.

Speaker, when will St. Catharines and Niagara see two-way, all-day GO?

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): The member for Hastings–Lennox and Addington.

Mr. Ric Bresee: Since 1967, GO Transit has kept the GTHA moving. The previous governments failed to invest in public transit and keep up with the demand required. In a recent report, a total cost of congestion to Ontario’s economy cost the province over $56 billion a year in lost GDP. Ontario’s population is rapidly growing, and we need to give people more options to get where they need to go.

That’s why our Premier and our government are moving forward with GO 2.0. We’ve directed Metrolinx to develop a plan with the federal government with CN and CPKC rail to shift freight rail from existing passenger lines to a dedicated freight bypass along the 407 corridor, because we know that for Ontario’s economy to continue to grow, we need to keep building roads, highways and public transit all across this province.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Back to the member for St. Catharines.

Mrs. Jennifer (Jennie) Stevens: You know, we have not seen any expansion to GO in Niagara. That answer is the same—it’s no answer, it’s no timeline and no accountability.

So to the minister: This government continues to say GO is coming to Niagara, but not to St. Catharines or Niagara Falls, where people actually live and work. Instead, they’re focused on a Ferris wheel, casinos and a mini Vegas in Niagara Falls, when people can’t even get there. No trains, just talk—and the priorities are completely off the rails.

Speaker, how does this minister justify choosing flashy projects over transit that Niagara so desperately needs?

Mr. Ric Bresee: Some quick facts for the member opposite: The GO Transit service area—which includes the greater Toronto and Hamilton region, Kitchener-Waterloo, Barrie and Niagara—is expected to grow to 15 million people by 2051. On January 9, 2025, the Premier directed Metrolinx to begin developing a plan for GO 2.0.

GO 2.0 proposes to explore the longer-term expansion for GO passenger rail service across the greater Golden Horseshoe, beyond the current GO expansion plans. These rail lines and GO rail extensions—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): Order. The member for St. Catharines will come to order.

Mr. Ric Bresee: —are owned or partially owned by the freight companies—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Donna Skelly): I apologize to the member.

The member for St Catharines will come to order. The Associate Minister of Energy-Intensive Industries, for the second time, has been asked to come to order.

You have 10 seconds to respond.

Mr. Ric Bresee: Thank you, Speaker.

The current plan to build out the GO network, called GO expansion, aims to create a network with the capacity to deliver service every 15 minutes or better, all day in both directions across the core segments of the GO rail network. We’re getting it done.

Impaired drivers

Mr. Stephen Blais: My question is for the Attorney Genera