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

November 3, 2021

42nd Parliament, 2nd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcript 2021-Nov-03 vol. A (PDF)

L015A - Wed 3 Nov 2021 / Mer 3 nov 2021

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Wednesday 3 November 2021 Mercredi 3 novembre 2021

Orders of the Day

Working for Workers Act, 2021 / Loi de 2021 visant à oeuvrer pour les travailleurs

Members’ Statements

Optometry services

Holocaust Education Week

Employment standards

Scleroderma

Valhalla Project Niagara

Remembrance Day

Parents Engaged in Education

Hindu Heritage Month

Remembrance Day

Visitors

Committee sittings

Question Period

Employment standards

Veterans

Government accountability / Responsabilité gouvernementale

Protection for workers

Northern highway improvement / Amélioration d’autoroute dans le Nord

Child care

Veterans

Water quality

COVID-19 immunization

Digital government

COVID-19 immunization

Employment standards

Optometry services

COVID-19 response

Small business

Notice of dissatisfaction

Petitions

Optometry services

Tenant protection

Optometry services

Tenant protection

Optometry services

Land use planning

Multiple sclerosis

Front-line workers

Optometry services

Gasoline prices

Long-term care

Child care

Patrick Albert Hayes

Orders of the Day

Providing More Care, Protecting Seniors, and Building More Beds Act, 2021 / Loi de 2021 visant à offrir davantage de soins, à protéger les personnes âgées et à ouvrir plus de lits

The House met at 0900.

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

Prayers.

Orders of the Day

Working for Workers Act, 2021 / Loi de 2021 visant à oeuvrer pour les travailleurs

Resuming the debate adjourned on November 2, 2021, on the motion for second reading of the following bill:

Bill 27,

An Act to amend various statutes with respect to employment and labour and other matters / Projet de loi 27, Loi modifiant diverses lois en ce qui concerne l’emploi, le travail et d’autres questions.

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

Mrs. Lisa Gretzky: I appreciate the opportunity to continue the debate that I started yesterday before the House adjourned.

Today, we’re again talking about Bill 27, the Working for Workers Act, and, as I pointed out yesterday, the name is really a misnomer. There is so much lacking in this bill and there have been so many government actions over their last three years that have shown that they are not really there for the workers. I’m going to highlight some of the things that could have been done, can still be done—could still be done to this day—but that could have been done; legislation that we had tabled on this side of the House that the government could have passed a long time ago, or could have incorporated into this bill but chose not to.

So I’m going to take the opportunity to quickly highlight some of those things. But I think in the just under 15 minutes that I have left, I’m also going to concentrate, really, on sharing the stories of injured workers, the stories of the families that were left behind when a worker got sick or injured on the job and died because of that. I’m going to share some stories about what it’s been like for them, what their life has been like and what it’s been like for them when it comes to WSIB, because this bill before us does absolutely nothing for those workers and for those families.

So, first and foremost, what’s missing from this bill: My colleague from Niagara Falls had tabled a bill around deeming and WSIB. Deeming is a practice within WSIB where they decide—not medical professionals; WSIB decides—what somebody is capable of doing, regardless of their illness or their injuries. And more often than not—I would say all the time, frankly—they dream up some job that doesn’t exist and say, “You could do that. You’re capable of doing that job”—that doesn’t exist—“so therefore, we don’t have to give you your benefits through WSIB.” The government could have passed my colleague’s bill and didn’t; they could have incorporated it into this bill and they chose not to.

The same colleague from Niagara Falls had also tabled presumptive legislation for front-line workers who contracted or came down with COVID-19 at work. We’re talking more specifically about health care workers, really. Oftentimes—and it’s no secret; this has been going on for many, many years—when a worker is injured or becomes sick on the job, they have to prove, they have to fight to prove, that that injury or that illness was actually acquired in the workplace. Even if it is obvious that that is where it happened, they’ve had to fight WSIB in order to get the benefits that they’re entitled to.

Again, the government didn’t end up passing that legislation, it’s not in this bill, and it continues to happen today. If the government really wanted to be on the side of workers, they would pass those bills or they would bring legislation of their own forward to address those issues.

As a result of WSIB continuing to deem workers or say that they didn’t acquire their illness on the job, those workers are being forced onto the Ontario Disability Support Program, ODSP, and are being sentenced to a life in poverty. And I think it’s really important to point out that WSIB is funded by premiums paid by employers

whereas ODSP is funded by the taxpayers. In this bill, the government is saying, “We’re going to take about half of the $6.1 billion that’s in WSIB and give that back to the employers. We’re going to reward them.” I think that is really not conducive to being on the side of workers. That money should be going to injured workers. That money should be going to the widows and the widowers and the children of workers who have died on the job. That’s where that money should be going. Injured workers shouldn’t have to be forced onto ODSP.

As I said, I want to read some stories, because I think we’ve all heard them—or those of us that are actually willing to talk to the injured workers and their families have heard these stories—and I think that they speak volumes, and I think they speak for themselves, and I think they speak loud and clear about WSIB and the failings of WSIB and the failure of this Conservative government, and the Liberals before them, to fix a system that does not work in favour of workers, does not work in favour of the people it was meant to support.

Some of these are going to be hard to hear—they’re certainly hard to read—and I can imagine that they were hard for these workers and their families to live through and continue to live through.

The first story comes from the spouse of a gentleman named Bud Simpson, who worked at Fibreglass Sarnia. I want to give recognition to my colleague from Niagara Falls and to the cluster of advocacy groups who did a press conference—I believe it was last week—to highlight these clusters throughout Ontario. There’s a lot of background information on different regions within the province and how we see clusters of individuals getting sick and dying as a result from workplace hazards. This particular story, as I said, is about Bud Simpson and it was submitted by his wife, Jean. He worked at Fibreglass Sarnia.

“What is your life worth? My husband would not have been asked this question when he interviewed for a position at the Sarnia Fibreglass factory and truthfully it likely never crossed his mind until he became sick.

“Bud Simpson was a 36-year employee for Fibreglass Sarnia when the plant closed in 1991. Within six months of the plant closing, he became sick. His diagnosis was nasopharyngeal and gastrointestinal cancer that metastasized to the brain. With CT scans, 110 radiation treatments on his head, losing all his teeth being fed through a feeding tube, and talk of removing his nose, I could never have imagined that WSIB would wage war against my family for so long. They have been unrelenting in their pursuit to deny that his workplace exposures caused his illness and ultimately his death. I fear that my husband’s WSIB claim will outlive me.

“I recently heard that WSIB refunded employer contributions in the millions of dollars. How can this be allowed to happen when my husband’s claim and others like his go unresolved? I want justice for Bud and myself, and I don’t want others to suffer and go through the trauma this broken system has put me through for the past 20-plus years.”

General Electric was the lifeblood of Peterborough, Ontario, housing 6,000 workers in its heyday. The plant was infamous for building small to large A/C and D/C motors and generators, power conversion panels and nuclear fuel bundles. But it also housed asbestos, 40 known carcinogens and 3,000 chemicals—exposures that widows, workers and their advocates took years to document retrospectively. I’m going to read a story that was submitted by Sara Sharpe about GE Peterborough.

Sara writes, “My husband worked at GE Peterborough for 42 years and died from occupational disease on August 17, 2014. He had just nicely retired when he was diagnosed with esophageal cancer and passed away in two weeks. It was never about the money; who cares about the money. All I ever wanted was to have my husband back, enjoying our retirement, watching his girls grow into beautiful women, walking them down the aisle, seeing his first grandchild. GE took that from him at an early age. I was desperately hoping for closure, which I don’t have because of the fight I have had to endure, while trying to grieve my husband and the absence of their dad in my girls’ lives.”

I have a story about Jim Hobbs, who worked with McIntyre Powder in northern Ontario. Just for a backgrounder, miners, primarily in northern Ontario mining communities, were historically exposed, from 1943 to 1979, to mandatory industrial medical treatments involving the inhalation of finely ground aluminum dust known as McIntyre Powder. Miners were locked in a room each work shift, and aluminum dust was blown into the room using compressed air. The aluminum dust was administered on the theory that it would prevent the lung disease silicosis, in an effort by mine owners to avoid compensation costs once silicosis became a compensable industrial disease.

This is Jim Hobbs’s story, from McIntyre Powder: “Jim Hobbs worked as an underground miner and he was one of over 27,000 Ontario miners who was locked in a room every work shift and forced to inhale finely ground aluminum dust known as McIntyre Powder, on the unproven theory that it would prevent silicosis. Jim was diagnosed with Parkinson’s in 2001, and filed a WSIB claim in 2011. His claim was denied. In the absence of WSIB supports, Jim’s family was unable to keep him at home as he reached end-stage Parkinson’s, and he died alone on the floor of a nursing home on May 24, 2017.

Three months later, the WSIB commissioned a study which was completed in 2020 and found a link between McIntyre Powder and the risk of Parkinson’s. In October 2020, WSIB granted Jim’s Parkinson’s claim, including health care benefits—three years after his death.” That was sent in by Janice Martell, who is Jim’s daughter.

I also want to share the story of Jim, who worked in a paper mill in Dryden: “The once sharp and quick-witted man was now suffering from memory loss and brain fog. His energy for work had been replaced with crippling headaches, daily battles with gastrointestinal problems and a constant battle with tinnitus. During his time, he was exposed to numerous chemicals and forced to breathe them in until a tester could arrive, sometimes taking four hours. Twice during the seven-month project Jim passed out, woke up to find himself in an oxygen mask and was quickly sent back to the workplace.

Not only is Jim forever forced to deal with the aftermath of the unsafe working conditions at Dryden mill, so too does his family have to adapt. Jim described how the aftermath has added significant stress and strain on his spouse. Unable to leave his house without a caregiver and unable to drive because of his onset of seizures, taking care of her husband became a full-time job for Jim’s wife for several years.”

I have just under three minutes left, so I’m going to try and get through a few more stories. Unfortunately, I won’t have time to give the backgrounders on them, but I think the stories are very important to read.

This is about Ross MacKenzie, who worked at BFGoodrich: “Virginia wonders what hidden role that exposure played in the lives of their children. Their daughter Paula died of leukemia in 1987; a tumour was discovered in son Robert’s throat after his death as an infant in 1966. ‘How do I know that the cancer wasn’t from me washing his clothes, and they got it?’ she said. ‘We didn’t know anything about cancer then, because that was a long time ago.’ By 2003, Ross was fully involved in a fight with cancer. His retirement vanished in a blur of radiation treatments, endless hospital visits and unexplained illnesses.

He died in November 2007.” Ross, as I said, died in 2007. He worked at BFGoodrich. His widow, Virginia, says he was regularly exposed at work to lampblack, cadmium and asbestos.

Here’s another story, about Kathy Byrd, who worked at Pebra/Ventra Plastics: “My partner Kathy Byrd worked at Pebra/Ventra for approximately 20 years when she was diagnosed with kidney and liver cancer. She fought for seven and a half months before she succumbed to her illness leaving behind two beautiful young daughters for me to raise on my own. Kathy’s claim for WSIB was denied and I am in an appeal at this time. This February will be eight years of fighting for compensation. Her daughters deserve to be compensated for growing up without a mother. To get married and plan a wedding alone.

To have children and no grandmother to share the joy. Compensation needs to recognize occupational illness and do the right thing!”

Here’s John’s story: “The day of John’s passing, I had accompanied him to his room for his usual rest. He was very restless, like he knew his time was near. He spoke of the conversations he had had with Lorna that very morning and reminded me to keep reminding her of his desire to see Gavin taken care of and to continue his workplace battles for those that had and were suffering to continue. It was deeply felt by him to say that. I should know because he passed just hours later. I was holding him.” That was from Dan Nicholson.

I have many stories here. I’m sure that my colleagues will want to share some of these stories too. But the underlying theme and the background to these stories is they worked in workplaces that were historically dangerous and exposed them to disease-causing elements. And even though it is well known that that was happening, and even though it is very clear that they acquired their illness on the job, WSIB continues to fight them, and this government has nothing in this bill to fix that.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bill Walker): It’s now time for questions and responses.

Mr. Jim McDonell: In every area of this province, even in the area I live, in the far east of the province, employers are having a hard time finding workers. I know in Cornwall, they’re busing people in from Ottawa, they’re busing people in from Quebec to fill positions. And yet, for 15 years, we saw Liberal inaction when it comes to supporting newcomers to Canada. We have newcomers that would love to work who are unable to work because of credentials not being in place, so eliminating Canadian work experience is a common-sense move that should have been made years ago.

Can the member opposite tell us in the House why they wouldn’t support this and support these people who are trying to make a living, happy to be in Canada, and then they face these new regulations? This is an opportunity, if we would get out of their way—well-trained, well-educated, in many cases, but not able to work in Canada or Ontario due to regulation. Why would you not support that?

Mrs. Lisa Gretzky: I appreciate the question. But I think that we need to talk about the work conditions, whether that is for newcomers to Canada or whether that is to workers already in workplaces in this province. It is one thing to say, “We’re going to put people to work. We’re going to get them jobs.” It’s a completely different thing to say that those workplaces are going to be safe, that no worker is going to go into a job in unsafe conditions and get injured or killed on the job.

I think that’s a really important discussion that the government side clearly doesn’t want to have, because it’s very obvious, through all of their questions throughout the last couple days, that they’re focused on one thing and one thing only: Trying to avoid talking about the fact that WSIB is broken, and this government has done nothing—not in this bill or previously—to address that.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bill Walker): I recognize the member from St. Catharines.

Mrs. Jennifer (Jennie) Stevens: Under the watch of this government, workplace traumatic fatalities have increased. In fact, sadly, we had one in St. Catharines just recently.

To the member, my colleague who has done a wonderful job on highlighting what people in Ontario are suffering with because of fatalities and things that have happened on the job: Do you think that this bill does enough to keep workers safe, changing WSIB to work not just for the employers but for workers too? I just want you to elaborate on that and, if you could, how WSIB is basically not listening to the workers or the injured workers’ doctors.

Mrs. Lisa Gretzky: I appreciate the question from my colleague for St. Catharines. The short answer to your question about WSIB and this bill is no. There is nothing in this bill that actually supports workers. There is nothing in this bill that says to employers who have a history of people getting injured or killed, like at Fiera Foods—there’s nothing in this bill that protects workers from workplaces like that. In fact, it’s just the opposite. With this bill, what this government is doing is taking money from the WSIB funds and giving it back to employers while the very workers who have become injured or killed on the job and their families are being denied the benefits they deserve.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bill Walker): Further questions and comments?

Ms. Goldie Ghamari: I listened intently to the member’s debate, and the question I have for the member is that the members opposite have been calling for more to be done to protect workers from temporary help agencies that don’t follow the rules; our proposed changes in this bill would do exactly this and clamp down on temp agencies that expose vulnerable workers.

Could the member opposite please explain why they do not support protecting workers?

Mrs. Lisa Gretzky: Wow. Apparently the member from Carleton and most of the members on the other side haven’t been listening to us on this side of the House—for years—as we raised issues about temp agencies and how they exploit people, and about WSIB and how it is broken and does not work on behalf of workers or their families.

I’m glad the member from Carleton raised temp agencies. I’m going to tell you a story about a registered nurse who I know who has been working at a large company in Windsor through a temp agency for 24 years—24 years. I ask the member from Carleton: Where in this bill are the protections for her? Where in this bill are the protections for the workers at Fiera Foods who have been injured or died on the job under this government’s watch? Where is that in this bill?

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bill Walker): I recognize the member from Brampton North.

Mr. Kevin Yarde: I want to thank my colleague for the incredible speech talking about this bill, the Working for Workers Act. Now, it’s obvious that the government doesn’t want to talk about WSIB, but you know what? We’re going to talk about WSIB.

The stories you told us about the people who suffer from occupational illness or injury on the job—it’s horrific. The fact that this government doesn’t want to acknowledge what’s happening in Ontario is pretty upsetting.

My question to you: With the lack of discussion on WSIB in this bill, what would you like to see in the bill that would enhance protections for workers in Ontario?

Mrs. Lisa Gretzky: I appreciate that question. What I would like to see is for the government to pass my colleague from Niagara Falls’s legislation around the practice of deeming—to ban the practice of deeming, and to listen to the health experts, the doctors and the individuals who are injured on the job when it comes to what they can and can’t do. What I would like to see is presumptive language in this bill so that workers who got COVID in their workplace don’t have to fight to prove that that has happened, because what will happen is they will lose and they will be forced onto ODSP and then a life of poverty.

What I would like to see in this bill is harsher penalties and even shutting down companies that continue to exploit temporary workers, where we see incredible numbers of workplace injuries and deaths with absolutely no consequences to the company where they work.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bill Walker): I recognize the member from Mississauga–Erin Mills.

Mr. Sheref Sabawy: I have been sitting here and hearing the speech from the member opposite. Thank you for all the points you raised.

My question is, you have been sitting in the opposition side with the previous government for 15 years, watching and cheering them on when they have been claiming that they are for the immigrants, for the newcomers, for workers, for supporting jobs, and they didn’t do anything about that. We are trying to push something to help people get to the jobs, and we are discussing all the elements or the points which are not in the bill: “This bill does not contain that. This bill does not contain this.” Why don’t we focus and try to discuss the points which are inside the bill? Can you tell me why you don’t support some of those points?

Mrs. Lisa Gretzky: The answer to that—and the member opposite should be ashamed to only want to focus on what is in the bill and not what is glaringly missing from this bill. Workers are dying in this province under your watch, and there is nothing in this bill to protect them. There is nothing in this bill to help to try to ease the financial burden of the families that are left behind because you support companies like Fiera Foods who exploit workers through temporary agencies. Many of those workers are immigrants, I will add.

You allow it to happen because you do not bring forward legislation to protect those workers. So don’t sit on that side of the House, sir, and tell me that this side of the House doesn’t care about workers, because your actions speak volumes as to how your side of the House actually feels about workers in this province and who you are truly trying to protect.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bill Walker): Further debate?

Mr. Robert Bailey: It’s a pleasure to rise this morning and speak to this bill and add a few comments to the debate on Bill 27, the Working for Workers Act, 2021.

Before I begin, I’d like to acknowledge the Minister of Labour and also the parliamentary assistant to the Ministry of Labour and their entire team at the Ministry of Labour, Training and Skills Development for the tremendous amount of work they have done on this transformational piece of legislation.

The Minister of Labour has made this point many times, but it is worth repeating today: Where we work, how we work and the meaning we find in what we do all need to adapt. Old models and thinking on both sides of the ideological divide no longer quite fit. Now is the time to ask ourselves, if work has changed, what changes do we have to make to help Ontario workers remain competitive? How do we continue to develop, attract and retain the best talent to keep our provincial economy roaring? How can we ensure that every worker has equal access to dignity and opportunity?

It’s clear from this bill we are debating here today that the Minister of Labour and his team have been thinking about those important questions and more over his time at the ministry. As we slowly emerge from the pandemic of the last 18 months, now is the time to make these important changes that are laid out in this act. Now, more than ever, our government is focused on acting with determination to ensure Ontario continues to be the best place in North America to work, and to recruit, retain and reward workers.

These proposed actions in the Working for Workers Act would, if passed, position Ontario as the jurisdiction that has the most competitive framework for workers and businesses to both benefit from our new world of work. With the right actions, we can help hard-working men and women prepare for lifelong careers that their families and our communities depend on.

Mr. Speaker, we have a plan to build the future of our great province. With Bill 27, the Working for Workers Act, we are rebalancing the scales and putting workers once again in the driver’s seat. If Bill 27 passes, we will be leading the way, not only in Canada but across North America. And, Mr. Speaker, that helps to explain why we are seeing so many positive media stories about the ideas in this bill and the Minister of Labour and his team.

Our mission is to give workers a hand up to better jobs, bigger paycheques and the protections they deserve. This bill is for the people who work, put in a good shift and take pride in a job well done. There is a lot of satisfaction in doing a job you enjoy and love, and being treated with respect and dignity in that role.

As I talk about this bill, I can’t help but recall my own previous career, long before being elected to the Legislature, with over 30-plus years working in Sarnia-Lambton’s Chemical Valley. I worked on construction, and then later with Nova Chemicals, as they built the first world-scale plant in 1972. And now, Mr. Speaker, 50 years later, they have invested over $2 billion in Sarnia-Lambton and are building a second plant, which I had the pleasure of touring recently with the Minister of Energy.

I want workers in Ontario to experience the opportunity, support and satisfaction of working in an environment similar to what I had the opportunity to experience in Sarnia-Lambton many years ago. I want to commend the Minister of Labour for focusing so much effort on raising the awareness of the opportunity that exists in construction and skilled trades across the province today.

I’m also proud to say that, during the height of COVID, with many safety and health protocols put in place, we were able to keep that Nova project, with employees of over 2,000 men and women on that site. We were able to keep it active, we kept that project going, and it’s on track today to open some time early in 2022.

As the Minister of Labour has noted many times, Ontario is facing a monumental labour shortage, with over 300,000 jobs going unfilled. Each of these jobs is a paycheque going uncollected and a family going another day without. Our government is strengthening our efforts to help workers learn the skills they need to fill new, in-demand roles in their own communities. We are doing this by investing more in training programs and employment services. We know that ordinary people across Ontario will be the ones to lay the foundation for a better tomorrow. At a time when many have been left without jobs, our efforts will help them connect with the new careers that they need to thrive.

Over the next decade, we expect the construction sector alone will need about 100,000 workers due to retiring men and women. That’s almost 22,000 more jobs than are expected to enter the industry at present count. These are opportunities for men and women to find meaningful and well-paid jobs that will help them support their families and our communities in the future—jobs, as the minister often says, with good pensions, defined-benefit pensions, health benefits and rewarding work and salaries upwards of $100,000 a year before overtime.

To close that gap, we’re investing in skilled trades and apprenticeship programs in conjunction with the many unions and non-union companies across this province and the colleges, like Lambton College in my riding. Our government’s skilled trades strategy aims to: break the stigma that some people attach to the trades, simplify the system to make it easier for apprentices to navigate and encourage more employer participation in these apprenticeships.

We keep hearing, Speaker, that young people, even if they’re aware of the trades as an option, don’t know how to get started. We aim to fix that. It should be as obvious to a young person how to become a carpenter or a pipe fitter as it is to become a banker or a lawyer. That is why this government has invested over $40 million in expanded youth awareness and training programs. This includes $20 million for Ontario’s Pre-apprenticeship Training Program. Some funding is specifically geared towards spreading opportunity widely by giving people from all walks of life exposure to the variety of good jobs in the trades. This free program includes a hand up with a work placement.

In total, this government is investing more than $271 million to remove obstacles to apprenticeships. This includes support for upgrading facilities with state-of-the-art equipment—a number of which are included in Sarnia; I’ve toured them—incentives to support apprentices as they move through their programs to become fully skilled tradespersons, and help for small and medium-sized employers to take on apprentices, with funding that encourages them to come together to provide a full scope of training practice and on-the-job mentorship for apprentices.

Mr. Speaker, it’s clear that this government is prioritizing good jobs, good working environments and career opportunities as foundational pillars of its plan to help grow our economy and help our province to recover from the global pandemic. The Working for Workers Act is just one legislative piece that will help this government and our government to deliver for workers and their families.

We also know that the Minister of Labour and the Premier made a very important announcement on the future of the minimum wage earlier yesterday. That change, which will be proposed in legislation to be tabled soon, is another example of how this government is focusing on supporting workers. There will be more to be said on that issue when it’s debated in the coming weeks, but for today I will keep my comments to the Working for Workers Act.

The Working for Workers Act makes a number of important changes, but it primarily focuses on some key issues, including the future of work, the right to disconnect, non-compete agreements, temporary help agencies, foreign credentials, and washroom access for delivery workers. The changes laid out in these areas of focus are designed to protect, support and attract workers, while giving businesses a competitive environment that sparks innovation and growth. Now is the time to take action on these issues, as the way we are working has been changing in Ontario, and COVID-19 has accelerated this change.

Earlier this year, the government created the Ontario Workforce Recovery Advisory Committee to examine the changing landscape of work and to provide recommendations to the province on what steps to take next. This committee met with over 100 individuals and groups and reviewed over 550 submissions. What was clear from this review is that the future of work is already here, today. The changes we make today will help us compete globally for the very best talent and investment.

As the minister said yesterday and the day before, Ontario can’t be the place where people burn out from their endless work and family time comes last. People need a break. Ontario is prioritizing workers’ mental health and family time. Right now, almost one third of the people of Ontario work half their week from home. That’s the highest rate of any province in Canada.

Nobody should be on call 24 hours a day—unless you’re a politician, I guess—yet some employees feel the obligation to continue to perform for their employer long after their regular workday is done.

If passed, this act will require businesses with 25 employees or more to have a written disconnect from work policy for their staff. Requiring employers to have these policies in place will go a long way to supporting healthy workplaces and a strong work-life balance. Even for those of us who love our jobs, regular time away from the constant demands is important, and I believe this will lead to better performance while on the job.

This act is also addressing the use of non-compete clauses by employers. Changes in Bill 27 will prohibit non-compete clauses used by employers with their employees. This change will assist start-ups and growing businesses in attracting top-flight talent to work on exciting projects. It will support workers looking to advance their careers and gain valuable experience.

The banning of non-compete clauses will likely lead to increased labour mobility and improve Ontario’s ability to attract top talent, helping us to strengthen our economy and grow our emerging sectors. Major jurisdictions around the world, like California, have already made the move to ban non-compete clauses many years ago, and they continue to flourish in top-earning sectors like tech. For Ontario’s tech sector, access to talent is one of the biggest challenges the industry faces. Talent mobility will spar innovation and help Ontario to compete on the world stage.

The Working for Workers Act will also focus on cracking down on recruiters and temporary help agencies that don’t follow the rules. Most help agencies in this province are tremendous partners to workers and employers, matching skills to labour needs. Unfortunately, there are agencies taking advantage of workers, and that must come to a stop immediately. It is unacceptable that some temporary help agencies are paying people below the minimum wage and denying them other employment rights. They do this in attempt to gain a competitive advantage on cost with law-abiding agencies. We’re going to put a stop to that and return those stolen paycheques to the workers who earned them.

If passed, this act will require temporary help agencies and recruiters to have a licence and pay a security deposit to operate in Ontario. This proposal would also require companies to use agencies and recruiters who are licensed—only licensed—and, while this licensing framework is being implemented, Ontario will strike a dedicated team to identify agencies and recruiters who are exploiting workers. This team will crack down on these bad actors and recover the unpaid wages for exploited workers.

This sort of treatment of workers is unacceptable in Ontario, and our government is going to take action to put a stop to it. It’s just another way that our government will ensure that Ontario is the best place to work anywhere in the world. Having that reputation will help us to attract newcomers to our province who will help to grow our economic opportunity in the years to come. Our government is proud that Ontario is the first choice for so many newcomers—many of whom are in this House today—who have come to Canada in search of greater economic opportunity for themselves and their families.

Newcomers create businesses in our communities, fill much-needed roles in our society and spark our entrepreneurial spirit.

In my riding of Sarnia–Lambton alone, thanks to great work being done in part by Lambton College, we are seeing a significant number of newcomers moving to our community, many from India and China, among a number of many other countries around the world. This is driving economic investment, including new shops, restaurants and a variety of services.

However, in Ontario, only about one quarter of internationally trained immigrants in regulated professions were working in jobs that matched their level of qualification from the country of origin, yet there are about 300,000 unfilled jobs across the province, costing us billions of dollars every week in lost output. That is why our government, through this act that we are proposing, is proposing to create a clear path for these newcomers to fully apply their skills. Our government is proposing changes that will help to remove these barriers to getting licensed in regulated professions.

I know that we’ve had discussions with over 23 trades and 14 professions, such as lawyers, engineers, architects, plumbers, electricians, accountants, hair stylists, teachers and early childhood educators. These are important changes being proposed after extensive consultations with over 30 stakeholder groups and 16 regulatory bodies.

I know it has come up in debate about the health care credentials. That’s a bigger nut to crack. I think we all know that certain groups like to control the numbers—that’s the only way to paint it. There are people out there who want to control the market supply and demand, but we’re going to work on that as well. We’ll get this act done, and then I know that the Minister of Labour and people in this government are going to continue to work because of the shortage we have in the medical field of doctors and highly trained individuals. We’re going to work on that next, but one step at a time.

Throughout that consultation process, the government heard that Canadian work experience requirements and red tape were making it difficult for new Canadians to find good jobs. This government is addressing those hurdles and making the changes that will make a real difference in the careers of newcomers to Ontario. Because of these changes, it is expected that connecting newcomers to jobs that match their qualifications will increase Ontario’s GDP by up to $12 billion to $20 billion yearly over the next five years.

That is a great impact on GDP, something this province needs to do if we’re going to continue to grow and provide the services that everyone has come to expect in this country. This just makes good sense.

Finally, in my remaining time, I’d like to briefly comment on a matter of fundamental decency in our new world of work. It goes without saying that in the last 20 months the reliance on delivery drivers has been central to navigating many businesses throughout this pandemic. Over 240,000 drivers in our province have been keeping goods moving and the economy going.

I actually was watching the news at about 6 o’clock this morning, and we’re not alone in Canada or Ontario. I think the headline said on the TV this morning, out of the States, that they’re short 800,000 drivers. That’s why they’re having a lot of problems with the ports. Even with trying to work 24 hours a day, they don’t have the trucks to actually move the product. If they could get it unloaded, then they have no way to move it; they just dump those modular setups on the side streets, go back and get another one. And then people can’t even get out of their driveways. I don’t think we have anything like that in Ontario yet—and hopefully, we don’t.

These drivers have done an essential job. They’ve delivered anything from personal protective equipment and essential groceries to clothes and supplies for those people working from home. Whether it is courier drivers, truck drivers or food delivery workers, like SkipTheDishes, Uber and others—I’ve never used any of them, but I know lots of people who do—they have all played a role in maintaining a strong supply chain.

Increased demand has meant many more hours on the road. I’ve heard from truck drivers in my own riding of Sarnia–Lambton that one of the easiest and most important things that our government could do to help them is to permit washroom access at businesses where these drivers are either picking up or making their deliveries. It seems unconscionable to me that we’d even have to talk about this and put it in legislation. To me, it would just be common decency, and people should do it. Do the right thing, I always say. Treat others like you’d like to be treated yourself: That’s what my mother told me.

That is exactly why we are proposing it in the Working for Workers Act. It’s a small thing, but very important.

Treating these drivers with dignity and respect is the right thing to do. Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned at the start, I’m really impressed with the work that the Minister of Labour and his whole team at the Ministry of Labour, Training and Skills Development have done on this Working for Workers Act.

We’ve heard loud and clear that stakeholders across the province also agree with the direction we’re taking. For example, I could quote Mr. Joseph Mancinelli, a gentleman I know well, vice-president of the Labourers’ International Union of North America. He called this act an “important announcement” by the Minister of Labour that will “help our economy and communities thrive.” I noticed Mr. Jerry Dias from Unifor was at the announcement the other day, along with Smokey Thomas—someone many of us in this building know well—from OPSEU, also supporting this act and the movement to the $15-an-hour minimum wage.

To quote Smokey Thomas, president of OPSEU, he said, “This government is listening to us, and as a result, real working people will benefit.” I couldn’t agree more, Mr. Speaker. I strongly—

Interjections.

Mr. Robert Bailey: I hear other people have got comments, it sounds like. That’s good.

I strongly encourage all members of this Legislature to support Bill 27, the Working for Workers Act. By taking the steps proposed in this bill now, we can ensure Ontario remains the best place to live, have a meaningful career, raise a family and thrive.

I know there are other issues that we want to see addressed. I do as well. I’ll try to talk about that in the questions and answers when I have a moment to respond.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for the time this morning.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bill Walker): It’s now time for questions and responses.

Mrs. Jennifer (Jennie) Stevens: I wrote a letter to the Minister of Labour highlighting the seriousness of the workplace accident at THK in St. Catharines, with the fact that an employee had almost been crushed. It required quick action from your ministry and the WSIB.

Injury rates and traumatic fatalities like the one we just had in St. Catharines recently have increased since 2017. That’s under your watch. Real workers who get injured, like my constituent Steve Mitchinson, have found out that there are too many loopholes that are prejudicial to injured workers. The big one: No fixed timeline for the employer to issue their notice of readiness to appeal.

I am sad that this bill does not do anything to address the concerns real workers are having with the system right now. My question is directly from the family of Steve: Mr. McNaughton knows that he needs to get down from his soapbox and act with sincere interest for the injured workers, not the employer. Whose health and safety is Minister McNaughton really concerned with?

Mr. Robert Bailey: Thank you to the member from St. Catharines for that question. I know that the minister has beefed up the inspection squad. I think he’s doubled the amount of inspectors who are going to go out and inspect every workplace. I wish I had my notes here with me, but I know they conducted something like 57,000 or 60,000 ministry inspections of workplaces all across the province, both during COVID, and that’s still going on today at this time. I know that those inspectors have been hired.

In cases like Fiera Foods—which has come up a number of times this morning, and I’ll talk about that later too—these additional 100 inspectors have investigative backgrounds. They have come from law enforcement. They all have the authority to go into these places and actually lay charges, as well, that can go to criminal proceedings.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bill Walker): Further questions and responses?

Mr. Lorne Coe: What an excellent presentation by the member from Sarnia–Lambton. This is a member who has been standing up and lifting up workers and their families for quite a long time. An example of that was the debate, Speaker, that you’ll recall we had on line 5, and how well he spoke and with such passion for the workers and families in his riding.

Speaker, through you, I’d like the member to speak about the stakeholder support for the direction of the bill we’re debating this morning and how well that has added to moving forward with the bill and the subsequent implementation.

Mr. Robert Bailey: Thank you to the member from Whitby. Speaker, through you and to him, there are a number of quotes I have here. I just happened to find them on my desk here. I’ve already quoted Mr. Mancinelli, but there’s Chris Albinson, the president and CEO of Communitech: “Communitech is pleased to see Ontario level the playing field for workers, including tech workers,” and it goes on at great length.

Here’s Matthew Thornton, vice-president of public affairs for the Ontario Real Estate Association: “Kudos to Minister @MonteMcNaughton who is proving that being pro-worker is much more than just being....

“Some bold and smart policy solutions.”

Mayor Crombie, from Mississauga: “Thank you to Minister McNaughton and the Ontario government for tabling this legislation that removes barriers for newcomers seeking employment, including the requirement for Canadian working experience. As a city built and strengthened by newcomers, Mississauga naturally welcomes this legislation.” That’s signed Bonnie Crombie, mayor of Mississauga.

I think I already mentioned Mr. Mancinelli.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bill Walker): I recognize the member for York South–Weston.

Mr. Faisal Hassan: I was listening very intently to the member from Sarnia–Lambton. He talked about jobs, but unfortunately, this bill, which is entitled “working for workers,” doesn’t talk about employment numbers. For example, here in the GTA alone, we are experiencing the greatest decline in employment. Also, young people—I am the official opposition’s youth opportunities critic—are experiencing the largest decline in employment after the pandemic and beyond, and there’s nothing in this bill to support them, to create jobs. It is also above the employment average in my own riding of York South–Weston.

What is this government going to do? Is it going to implement internships and placements and co-ops for young people to gain experience?

Mr. Robert Bailey: Thank you to the member from York South–Weston for that question. I’m glad I got asked that. That’s something I’ve worked on with the Minister of Labour long before today, long before this bill, talking about the opportunities. When I worked in industry, we used to bring young men and women in from the high schools to work on work terms at Nova Chemicals—Petrosar back in those days—and they all went on, a lot them, to take up the trades later on. It was their first exposure, in some cases.

I know that the Minister of Labour and the Minister of Education are going to expose younger people—not even in grade 7 or 8; as early as grade 1 or grade 2—to a little bit about labour and about what it’s like to work with your hands, to take away the stigma that some parents seem to have, that they’ve got to have a university degree or a college degree for their children to be a success. There’s no shame to be a blue-collar worker and make great money, Mr. Speaker.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bill Walker): I recognize the member from Barrie–Innisfil.

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: My question to the member from Sarnia–Lambton is—he’s always on the side of workers, as our chief whip mentioned with line 5. I know it comes as a great frustration with the NDP, as they didn’t show themselves to be on the side of workers at the time, but they sometimes come around.

This bill that is before us: Can the member—because you’ve worked so closely with the Minister of Labour—tell us why it is so important to introduce this bill now, to really lift up workers coming out of COVID-19? What have you heard when you worked with the minister on this particular bill?

Mr. Robert Bailey: Thank you to the member from Barrie–Innisfil. As I have had many discussions lots of times driving back and forth from Queen’s Park to Sarnia–Lambton and Lambton–Kent–Middlesex with the minister, we’ve had lots of opportunities to talk about the way work is changing. He’s very innovative and has got lots of new ideas.

We do know—as the member from York South–Weston said, in his riding alone—in all of our ridings, there’s a shortage of workers. I have over 6,500 skilled trades workers in my riding of Sarnia–Lambton, all the building trades—pipe fitters, boilermakers, carpenters. One third of those people are going to be eligible to retire in the next couple of years. We need people to replace them.

We talked about knocking 1,000 hours off apprenticeships to get people into the field quicker. I know that there’s an opportunity for lots of young men and women going forward—

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bill Walker): Thank you.

I recognize the member from Windsor West.

Mrs. Lisa Gretzky: I want to point out that the member for Sarnia–Lambton lives in Chemical Valley. In Chemical Valley, there’s not just one disease cluster; tragically, there are several. First came rampant asbestos exposure in a local foundry, which caused asbestos-related cancers among workers. Then came another cluster from a fibreglass factory, with exposures to the “dirty dozen” substances, including asbestos, toxic chemicals and silica, and many more exposures and diseases followed.

Workers in Sarnia have suffered much more than the Canadian average from a wide range of cancers and other diseases, including Canada’s highest rate of mesothelioma, an aggressive cancer inextricably linked to asbestos exposure.

So I guess my question to the member from Sarnia–Lambton, “the champion of workers,” as he and others on his side want to call him: Explain to me—no, better yet, explain to Jean Simpson, the widow of Bud Simpson, why for 20 years—and you’ve been the MPP there for 14 of those—they have had to continue to have to fight WSIB in order to get the benefits that they deserve. What kind—

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bill Walker): Thank you.

The member from Sarnia–Lambton.

Mr. Robert Bailey: Thank you to the member for Windsor West. I know Jean Simpson. I have met with those widows of Chemical Valley over the years. We’ve worked with them in my office. I was working on this long before you ever got elected here, so I won’t take any lectures from you about working with people from Chemical Valley. I know them. I’ve worked in those companies myself. There’s a great health and safety program there.

A lot of these industries started before there were any health and safety acts like we have today. We’ll continue to work with people like Jean and others, the widows. The WSIB is arm’s length from the Ministry of Labour. I would like to work with you as well to make those kinds of changes, because—

Interjection.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bill Walker): Order.

Mr. Robert Bailey: Well, you can take it and do what you want with it. I’m just saying that there are people who want to work, who are trying to do the right thing, and I won’t make any apologies for that on this side of the House.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bill Walker): Further debate?

Miss Monique Taylor: I’m privileged, as usual, to be able to stand at my seat as the MPP for Hamilton Mountain and to be able to speak to this bill, Bill 27, the Working for Workers Act. It’s a great title, as we have seen on many bills that come out of this government, but as we look through the bill, we have great concerns about how we are working for workers in this bill.

There are some great measures within this bill that have been asked for for many years, such as—I believe it’s

schedule 3—the entity of Skilled Trades Ontario professions, for new immigrant workers to be able to get to the jobs that they have been trained to do in their homelands and who are very qualified to do those jobs when they come here. This is something that we’ve definitely been hearing about for years and we’re pleased for these workers to be able to finally get into these roles and to be able to share their skills here with us in Ontario to make Ontario a better place. That is fantastic that we’re seeing that in this bill.

It’s unfortunate that the government has left health professionals out of this bill, because there are many people who come here and have amazing health professional skills and qualities that could be shared here in Ontario, particularly when we will see—and we are seeing—a shortage in our health care sector. They could have ensured that there were measures in place to help fast-track health care workers to be able to get into Ontario speedily, but there’s nothing. There’s nothing in this bill to help those health care workers, which we find unfortunate.

From there,

schedule 2 of the bill is about disconnecting from work. We know that many employers expect people to work at all hours, particularly when we all have cellphones and email at our fingertips, and so the right to disconnect is a good thing. The unfortunate piece is that it’s only for employers that have 25 employees or over. What happens to those one to 24 employees in the small businesses that will not be able to disconnect from their jobs? It leaves a lot of workers out of that provision, but again, not something that we disagree with, that’s for sure.

It also lacks enforcement measures to be able to go with that, and that is something that we see very often in legislation that’s put forward—it’s not just this government; it’s been governments before—without enforcement measures to be able to police that. So how is that going to happen? I believe it will be up to employers to make those policies with, again, no enforcement attached, so it’s concerning.

I want to say, Speaker, that the greatest concern I have with this bill, as you’ve heard from my colleagues as well, is

schedule 6 when it comes to the WSIB. I know that all members in this House have heard from injured workers in the province of Ontario and in their own ridings. They hear from constituents who are calling their offices looking for help with WSIB. We have the workers’ advisory centre in Hamilton to be able to help to take on those caseloads.

New Democrats historically have taken on WSIB cases in our offices, and they’re huge workloads. So I’m grateful to the workers’ advisory centre to be able to take those cases on and for us to be able to refer them to that office to provide that necessary action, because a lot of these cases just continue on for years and years and years. Why should a person who is injured on the job have to fight for benefits that they so rightly deserve?

We would not want that for our own family member, and yet we leave thousands and thousands of Ontarians just hanging on by a thread, needing medication, needing physio, needing whatever they need to be able to recover, hopefully to be able to get them back to work. That would be the ultimate goal. But there are, I’m sure—I know—many who never see a dime from WSIB and have been fighting for years.

We have definitely heard stories this morning of those exact cases. I’ve had many meetings in my office with injured workers and people coming to me just desperate for help with WSIB. Sometimes the call from our office will help, but it shouldn’t have to get to that point for a constituent. Other times, it doesn’t make a difference.

Hon. Sylvia Jones: Political interference? Really? That’s appropriate?

Miss Monique Taylor: I hear the member opposite chirping. I hope that when it’s time for questions, she will stand up in her place and talk about WSIB, and talk about the WSIB cases that come through her office and how her office helps her constituents fight them. First of all, they shouldn’t have to be fighting for benefits that they’re entitled to when they’re injured on the job, and it only accumulates, the mental health and more issues on top of your body not being well. Now we’re putting your mind into a place of unwellness that only exacerbates your physical feeling, as we all know.

It’s shameful that the government did not see the way forward, when putting together this bill, to ensure that injured workers had what they needed.

There have been years after years after years of changes to the WSIB funds. I have some percentages here. Willy Noiles, the acting president of the Ontario Network of Injured Workers Groups, had this to say about

schedule 6: “Between 2010 and 2017, WSIB benefits paid out to injured workers were cut by more than half, and the Ford government’s solution is to give employers more money back, more money on top of the 52% cut in premiums in 2018, 2019 and 2020. How about using the surplus to ensure workers are taken care of when injured at work? Now, that’s what we would call working for workers.” This is what the injured workers of Ontario are saying about this bill. They have been promised that they were going to be made whole. Year after year after year, under the Liberals, the premiums were taken down for WSIB.

They were promised by the WSIB leadership that when the unfunded liability was resolved, they would be made whole again.

I have not heard of WSIB giving increases to injured workers, but I have heard of a lot of injured workers who live in poverty, struggling to keep food on the table for their families, and of many injured workers who can’t even stay on WSIB and end up on social assistance.

So now it’s not even about the premiums from WSIB and that insurance fund that’s supposed to take care of it; now it’s on the public dollar—who has to take care of that injured worker, again, in poverty, because we all know the benefits of social assistance are below poverty. If you’re injured in the province of Ontario, you are now thrown into poverty. And there is nobody on that side of the House who is sticking up for them. That is shameful.

I have been in this House through this entire debate—as I sit in my seat whenever the House is sitting—and I have not heard the members talking about improving WSIB. The only thing that the members opposite have been talking about is helping the employers to have more money in their pockets.

Well, I’m all about supporting our small businesses. I wish that the government was more about supporting small businesses from what we’ve seen through COVID-19—but how we fix those issues is not by taking down their WSIB premiums. Find other ways to incentivize those employers. Find other ways to help those small businesses.

The way that this bill is written and the way that this ratio is going to give it back—they’re going to receive percentages based on their employees, based on their income, is how WSIB ratios work, premiums work. So a small business is going to get a very small stipend back. But large businesses and corporations like Walmart and Costco and big box stores—there are going to be huge funds returned to those folks. So, again, the rich get richer and the little guy suffers. And the person who’s suffering the most right now is injured on the job, injured at work, through no fault of their own.

They woke up that day, they played by the rules, they went to work, they were injured, and then had to fight, and probably still continue to fight day after day after day, to keep what little they get from WSIB—and so many who are just simply denied WSIB.

That is absolutely shameful. That is not what the people of the province of Ontario deserve at all, and that is not working for workers. There is nothing in this bill that is going to help those injured workers or their families through a very traumatic time in their lives when they’re just not well—just not well because they went to work and they did the right thing that day.

I put forward a bill a little while back this year, the Workplace Safety and Insurance Amendment Act (Access to Mental Health Support for Essential Workers), 2021, and that bill was for front-line workers who had gone to work throughout the pandemic while the rest of us stayed home safely in our homes in front of our computers. These are grocery store workers, these are the PSWs who were in the horrific situations in long-term care, nurses and doctors who’ve seen so many things during COVID that many of us would not have had to face. We all know those stories, and we congratulate those same people and thank those same people.

Our young ones who were working in the grocery stores every day, they were afraid. Remember when we were going into the grocery stores at the beginning of the pandemic? I remember going into the grocery store in the beginning of the pandemic being afraid, feeling that pit in my stomach of, really, the unknown that we were all feeling. Well, we had people working in grocery stores who were there to serve us, and they didn’t have proper PPE. We were just figuring out infection control and all of this was happening. It was a scary, scary time.

People were left marked by those times. We heard stories of post-traumatic stress disorder from PSWs and grocery store workers. I put forward this bill, asking for presumptive legislation through WSIB to be able to cover the costs of mental health services for those same workers who were out there day in and day out, taking care of our communities—

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bill Walker): I apologize for interrupting the member from Hamilton Mountain.

Pursuant to standing order 50(c), I’m now required to interrupt the proceedings and announce that there have been six and a half hours of debate on the motion for second reading of this bill. This debate will therefore be deemed adjourned unless the government House leader directs the debate to continue.

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: Please continue.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bill Walker): The debate will continue.

However, the time being almost at the clock for members’ statements, we will note the time on the clock for the member from Hamilton Mountain and proceed shortly.

Second reading debate deemed adjourned.

Members’ Statements

Optometry services

Mrs. Lisa Gretzky: My office has received thousands of phone calls, emails and letters from concerned seniors, parents and social assistance recipients who are not receiving the eye care they desperately need. Parents are worried that their children cannot participate fully in class because they can’t see the board at the front of the classroom. Seniors have been forced to visit our emergency rooms to seek the vision care they desperately need. Eye care is critical health care, and it is important that all Ontarians have access to an optometrist when they need one.

I received an email from a concerned father whose 19-year-old daughter has been unable to book an appointment with her optometrist. Her vision has deteriorated so badly she can no longer drive herself to work or to buy groceries. I have also heard from a constituent that requires a yearly eye exam as he is diabetic. He says that his vision is now in jeopardy as he waits to see his doctor and have his prescription updated.

No one should have to go without health care in this province, and that includes vision care. Optometrists and their patients suffer from decades of chronic cuts to vision care. Optometrists have been forced to cover almost half of the cost of an appointment out of pocket because this government and the previous Liberal government have refused to properly fund OHIP-covered eye care.

Last week, Windsor city council sent a letter to the Minister of Health calling on her and the Conservative government to get back to the table and negotiate a fair agreement with the association of optometrists. I echo the call of Windsor city council and the thousands of individuals in my riding who contacted me about this important issue. It’s time for this government to say yes to eye care for all Ontarians and negotiate in good faith with optometrists in order to protect the vision of everyone in the province.

Holocaust Education Week

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: November marks the beginning of Holocaust Education Month, which aims to remember the lessons of the Holocaust. This year’s theme is “Holocaust Distortion, Myths and Misinformation.”

However, there are still examples around the world of such atrocities happening, be it Rwanda or the former Yugoslavia, and many more.

I’m proud that our government has committed to working with Ontario’s Jewish community to establish a Holocaust memorial on the grounds of the Legislative Assembly by 2025, thanks to the motion from the member from Eglinton–Lawrence. This memorial will mark the 80th anniversary of the liberation of the Nazi death and concentration camps, and the end of World War II.

The extermination and genocide of millions of Jewish people stands alone in human history for its horrors and its inhumanity. The memorial will help many generations remember and learn from this dark

chapter in human history and to reject all forms of evil, racism, discrimination and anti-Semitism, so that such atrocities will never happen again.

All Ontarians have a responsibility to remember the millions of innocent women, men and children who perished during the Shoah, and to honour and learn from survivors so that future generations will never let such atrocities happen again. Speaker, none is too many.

Employment standards

Ms. Bhutila Karpoche: The Ford government announced that in January 2022, Ontario’s minimum wage will become $15 an hour. Let me remind this government that one of the first things they did after getting elected was cancel minimum wage increases. Even if the Premier had not touched minimum wage at all, it would have still been higher than $15 an hour. Let me also remind this government that the people of Ontario demanded $15 an hour in 2015—six years ago. A $15 minimum wage in 2022 still leaves workers behind, especially considering the impact of the pandemic.

The cost of living has skyrocketed. Have you been to the grocery store lately? Food prices are up dramatically: milk is up 8%; meat up 15%; eggs, butter up 12%. And don’t even get me started on energy prices. Gas is up; hydro is up. Everything—food, housing, insurance prices—has gone up dramatically, but wages. Wages have not increased to keep up with these trends.

So stop patting yourself for action that is too little too late. You’ve missed the boat. Quite frankly, I don’t even care that, very opportunistically, this government is doing this seven months before an election; what I do care about is that you do it right, that workers get the wages they deserve—wages that match the times we’re living in.

Scleroderma

Mrs. Robin Martin: For approximately 6,000 Ontarians, scleroderma is a rare, chronic, multi-symptom autoimmune disease that affects the body’s connective tissue. The cause of scleroderma is unknown, and currently there is no cure. Mr. Speaker, there are treatments that can help slow the process down and improve the quality and quantity of life for persons affected by this disease, but these can be extremely costly and difficult to access.

Ontarians living with this rare and debilitating condition face significant physical and emotional challenges, often involving feelings of helplessness, hopelessness and feeling like they’re being a burden to others.

But there is hope for scleroderma patients. The Scleroderma Society of Ontario is an organization focused on raising awareness, funds and support for those with this disease, and they’re working towards a cure.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the entire team at the Scleroderma Society of Ontario, who are with us virtually today. They are terrific leaders in this fight to find a cure for this little-known and debilitating disease. I know that they are speaking with a number of the members of this Legislature today and in the coming weeks, and I certainly urge all of my colleagues to take the time to join them and engage in these important discussions.

Valhalla Project Niagara

Mrs. Jennifer (Jennie) Stevens: I am pleased to rise to speak about a great initiative in Niagara, the Valhalla Project Niagara, which has helped over 160 veterans and first responders with PTSD.

Last week, the Valhalla finished its 11th cohort. A non-profit, the heart of this caring group is the local board members, who are veterans and first responders: Shawn Bennett; Graham Bettes; Wendy Walker; Ken Beaudette; Lyle Renaud, director; Mary Homorodean; Annalise Hartwig; and Melodi Doiron. These motivated community members started a learn-to-live program that created a way for these veterans, firefighters and other first responders to get away from life and learn to live with their PTSD.

For over two years, through this local program, members of our community who have sacrificed so much are given a place to stay and learn that they are not alone, for five days away for no cost to them. This program and its team of volunteers began with training service dogs and has evolved into something so much more. Groups like the Valhalla bridge gaps that we still have in our support systems for the men and women who fought for our freedom and are still living with that cost.

As we come up to Remembrance Day, please join me in celebrating their work, their charity, their heart and their continued sacrifice at this time. It is important to remember our symbols matters, so actions must be done. I cannot be more proud that this work is being done in Niagara.

Remembrance Day

Mrs. Belinda C. Karahalios: Sometimes political partisan battles are referenced with warlike analogies: “We are in a war,” some say when discussing political debates. This government even referred to Vimy Ridge in one characterization of COVID-19, apparently to build some kind of analogy with their measures dealing with COVID-19 and an actual war. We often see the governing party make pledges for campaign donations, calling it their “war chest.”

All these references do is trivialize what it means to really be in a war, so I wish to take this opportunity to remember the courageous Canadians who have fought in real wars and those who continue to fight in real military conflicts. Unfortunately, this Remembrance Day, some of our veterans will be forced to use a vaccine passport to enter a Legion, others denied, and they are looking at our province being governed under emergency orders for almost two years. They must be wondering if anyone left knows what a real emergency looks like.

These courageous Canadians defended in international military conflicts our Canadian values, our freedoms, our way of life, the rule of law, our system of parliamentary democracy and the system of government that sees the people pass judgement on government and those occupying these seats changed through peaceful determinations at the ballot box. It is a privilege to live in a country like Canada, with one of the best qualities of life in the world, and throughout our history, Canadians have earned enormous respect by answering the call to fight against tyranny and evil in the international military.

We remember those who selflessly defended our freedoms, those who fought—many making the ultimate sacrifice. We can never repay the debt that we owe to them, but we can remember their courage, their bravery, their patriotism. Lest we forget.

Parents Engaged in Education

Mr. Aris Babikian: Parents Engaged in Education is a trend-setting Scarborough-based organization dedicated to help our most needy families and students. Its Education Bank office is the first one in Canada dedicated to empower our students to excel and build a better future.

The organization’s mission is to help students with the skills and knowledge to build a successful future. The Education Bank program provides more than 1,000 kids—including Scarborough–Agincourt students—with school supplies, books, computers, fun activities, lunch bags, amenities for self-care and mental health resources. They also play an important role in conflict resolution, parent engagement and school learning plans. The volunteer parents and educators have a critical role in the organization’s mission.

It was a great pleasure to join the Minister of Education on a visit to the Parents Engaged in Education office and observe first-hand their amazing work. Furthermore, I was honoured to donate some school supplies to their back-to-school backpack program. In addition, I had the great pleasure of joining the team at the Toronto Zoo to distribute 1,000 backpacks.

I would like to extend my heartfelt gratitude to Theresa Pastore, the executive director; the board members; and the volunteers for their commitment and sacrifices.

Hindu Heritage Month

Mr. Kevin Yarde: It’s an honour to rise today on behalf of the Hindu community of Brampton North. As we all know, the month of November is Hindu Heritage Month, a time for us to recognize the important contributions that Hindu Canadians have made to society across all fields, including but not limited to science, education, medicine, law, politics, media, business, culture, sports and philanthropy. It’s a time for all of us to come together and celebrate our vibrant Hindu community and the Hindu way of life.

I want to thank the Hindu Heritage Celebration Foundation for inviting me to their flag-raising ceremony in Brampton. We will be raising the heritage flag to mark the occasion.

Last month, I had the honour of attending some local temples, like the Shri Radha Madhav heritage and culture centre for their Dussehra celebration. I had a great time connecting with my constituents and celebrating the festivities.

The Hindu community around the globe celebrates Dussehra and the triumph of good over evil. Dussehra marks the culmination of Navratri and the beginning of Diwali. Diwali is one of the most important periods in November for Hindus across the world. This festival symbolizes the victory of light over darkness. Diwali will be celebrated tomorrow on November 4.

Mr. Speaker, Brampton North is home to thousands of Hindus, and I want to wish them and everyone here a happy Hindu Heritage Month and a happy Diwali.

Remembrance Day

Mr. Robert Bailey: It’s an honour and a privilege to rise in the House today and recognize the 100th anniversary of the Sarnia cenotaph in my riding of Sarnia–Lambton. Originally dedicated on November 7, 1921, a rededication ceremony was held recently to mark the important memorial’s centennial anniversary.

This Sarnia cenotaph exists to pay tribute to the valiant efforts of those who gave their service and their lives to protect the freedoms that we enjoy in Sarnia–Lambton and, indeed, across Canada.

The cenotaph honours and commemorates the valour and sacrifice of our veterans, along with the active members of the Canadian Armed Forces and their families, including those who served in our most recent wars like Afghanistan and Korea. We remember their sacrifice, we grieve with the loved ones of the fallen and we thank them for their service to our province and to our country.

On behalf of the government of Ontario, I offer my greatest respect for those who bravely answered the call to serve our country in the name of peace and freedom. Our government is proud that this memorial continues to stand today as a lasting legacy, giving all Lambtonians and Ontarians a place to show our gratitude to the heroes of yesterday and today.

Our veterans, our fallen soldiers and their families deserve our recognition, and our profound respect, appreciation and pride. We all owe a debt of gratitude to their unwavering dedication to preserving our freedoms. From myself and the province of Ontario, we thank you sincerely.

Visitors

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m very pleased to inform the House that page Zada Wallace from the riding of Toronto–Danforth is today’s page captain. We have with us today at Queen’s Park her mother Sevaun Palvetzian. Welcome to the Legislature Assembly of Ontario. We’re delighted to have you here.

Committee sittings

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Yesterday, November 2, the member for Timiskaming–Cochrane raised a point of order concerning the motion that was passed by the House the preceding day, Monday, November 1. The government House leader and the member for Ottawa South also made submissions related to the point of order that was raised.

The motion in question provided for six of the assembly’s nine standing committees to be authorized to meet at the call of the Chair for the remainder of the fall sitting period and any extension thereof. The member contended that the motion represents a misapplication of standing order 3. While the point of order should have been raised when the motion was originally before the House, I will nevertheless deal with it now.

The motion was moved as a routine motion, without notice, during Motions in the afternoon routine. The member noted that he found only one example in the previous 20 years, outside of the current Parliament, when a similar motion had been moved as a routine motion. The member put forward the case that while there had been similar motions in the recent past—each of which was moved during Motions, without notice, as a routine motion and each of which passed without procedural objection—they were out of step with long-standing procedure and should now be seen as contrary to practice and presumably not allowed in the future.

The member presented theoretical concerns about the effect that the motion could have on the operation of the relevant standing committees and specifically the potential for committees to be called to meet at irregular times or at times that might conflict with other parliamentary proceedings. Given this potential broad impact, in the opinion of the member, the motion should only have been moved either with unanimous consent or as a substantive motion with notice.

The fact that motions of this type have been put forward only relatively rarely as routine motions is not procedurally fatal to the orderliness of Monday’s motion. While the House may have chosen to deal with previous motions differently, the Speaker cannot know why this would be the case, and I was not aware of a procedural objection before yesterday. Was the motion a routine motion that was eligible to be moved during Motions, without notice? The very plain meaning of the definition of “routine motion” in standing order 3 suggests that it was. The motion relates exclusively to the meeting

schedule of the six named committees, which is one category of procedural motion that is specifically defined as being routine.

The speculative effects of the implementation of the motion are not relevant. Committees are the creatures of the House, and the House is fully empowered to instruct, direct and give authority to its committees as it sees fit. Nothing in the terms of the motion compelled or even contemplated that the committees would necessarily meet in the ways the member suggested. Nevertheless, the committees control their own agendas—subject to direction from the House, as I’ve noted—and thus are free to organize their business as they see fit, as determined ultimately by majority.

The motion does not suspend any standing orders or otherwise proscribe the normal procedures and rules of the six committees.

I therefore find that the motion is a routine motion, properly moved, considered and disposed of by the House, and that it does not contain provisions that are abusive of the rules or that represent an inherent disadvantage to any part of the House.

I want to thank the members for their submissions on this important matter.

It is now time for oral questions.

Question Period

Employment standards

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My first question is for the Premier. Apparently, the Premier has admitted that his low-wage policies don’t even fly with him. He admitted he couldn’t live on $15 an hour, yet he expects literally hundreds of thousands of Ontario workers to do just that. His low-wage policy took $5,300 out of those very workers’ pockets. For three years, this Premier kept that low-wage policy in place. It was one of his many, many bad ideas.

Why is he now refusing to put that $5,300 back into the pockets of the people that he took it from?

Hon. Doug Ford: Thank you for the question. Through you, Mr. Speaker, during this pandemic, Ontario relied more than ever on our front-line workers: the people that were working in the factories, people working in the retail and grocery stores, checking people out. But I’ll tell you, Mr. Speaker, they deserve the $15 an hour.

And I find it ironic, coming from the leader of the NDP. One day, she’s okay with the $15, and, bingo, the next day, it’s $17. People don’t know where the leader of the NDP stands. She flip-flops back and forth, not knowing where she stands on any single issue. It’s no, no, no: no to $15, no to building transit, no to building subways, no to building LTC. It’s always no.

Vote for the NDP, and there’s a party of no. No, no, no, no, no: That’s what the NDP are all about.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Well, Speaker, bingo: $15 was so 2016, 2017. It should have come in in 2019. Instead, this Premier stole—took—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m going to ask you to withdraw.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Withdraw—took $5,300 from the pockets of working people. And he’s the one that cancelled the subway, or rather the LRT, in my own riding, so I don’t know what he’s talking about.

Nonetheless, the low-wage policies of this government are absolutely hurting people. Everything is going up, Speaker. The cost of housing is up. The cost of electricity is up. The cost of gas is up. The cost of food is up. The cost of insurance is up. The cost of milk and butter is up.

The Premier knows his new minimum wage isn’t enough for hard-working families to make ends meet. My question is, will he do the right thing and return that $5,300 that he took out of the pockets of minimum wage workers?

Hon. Doug Ford: Mr. Speaker, there are 760,000 people who are doing cartwheels today. They ended up getting an increase. They ended up getting an increase to $15 an hour, well deserved. I know what really ticks off the NDP: when we are the party of the front-line workers—our workers. When we stood there with some of the top labour leaders in all of Ontario, the NDP were going crazy.

As a matter of fact, our friend Smokey Thomas from OPSEU said, “We actually have a government that is listening and actually doing some ... things for working people” of this province. And Jerry Dias from Unifor, one of the largest labour unions in the entire country, said, “Any time that we can increase the minimum wage to $15 an hour, which we know the majority of minimum wage workers in this province are women, it’s a day in which to recognize that things are moving in the right direction.”

Again, we’re the party of the working people. You’re the party of no.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: What the Premier needs to acknowledge is that he did take that $5,300 out of the pockets of these hard-working workers. And I can tell him, hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of people are at food banks today. They’re not doing cartwheels; they’re at food banks because of this Premier’s low-wage policies and his bad choices.

Everything is going up. We all know it. In fact, the dollar isn’t stretching as far as it has in the past because inflation is also eroding it. These low-wage policies hurt everybody. It hurts the workers, and it hurts the economy. It hurts the entire province.

Will the Premier do the right thing, put that $5,300 back in people’s pockets and give all the money back that folks deserve and actually help Ontarians to build a decent life in this province?

Hon. Doug Ford: One of the major reasons prices are going up is because of something called the carbon tax that the NDP voted for. I call it the big green scam instead of the big green deal. They love going after the little guy and gal. They love putting pressure on people who have to drive from point A to point B to drop their kids off or to go to work. They want to increase taxes. They voted no to lowering taxes. They voted yes to the carbon tax: 10 cents a litre. So every time you pump that gas in your car, just take a look at the leader of the NDP and know it’s 10 cents more.

And it’s going to continue going up. That is the cost when the NDP vote no to absolutely everything that you have.

Is there one thing that you stand for? They’ll stand for one thing one day; the next day, bang, it changes. On their website it was $15 two days ago; now all of a sudden it’s $17. They’ve got to make up their mind.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I will remind members to make their comments through the Chair.

The next question.

Veterans

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My next question is also for the Premier. Maybe he will take this one seriously. Yesterday, the member for St. Catharines asked a very straightforward question to get justice for veterans with disabilities, but Premier Ford had no answers for her. The Canadian Legion has asked the government to solve an unfair policy that literally results in injured veterans becoming homeless because the Premier is clawing back money from their pockets.

Veterans have served this country with valour and with honour. If they receive a disability award from Veterans Affairs Canada, Premier Ford claws it back. He shouldn’t be doing that. My question is, will he immediately end this unfair clawback of benefits that our veterans with disabilities rightfully should be getting?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): To reply, the member for Ottawa West–Nepean.

Mr. Jeremy Roberts: I appreciate the opportunity to speak about the commitment that our government has for veterans. That commitment was on firm display yesterday when our government introduced legislation to ensure that nobody can be denied the right to wear the poppy, because our government believes that it is so crucial for us to demonstrate our firm support to our veterans.

That’s why our government took action last year to expand the mandate of the Soldiers’ Aid Commission, a program that is here in Ontario, a unique program across the Confederation that demonstrates Ontario’s commitment to supporting veterans. Prior to last year, there were many servicemen and -women who couldn’t access these vital supports, and our government took action to change that. We expanded the Soldiers’ Aid Commission so that every man and woman who has served this country valiantly could access those supports that the government of Ontario provides.

We’re going to keep being there for veterans going—

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

The supplementary question.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Legion Ontario Command penned a letter to Minister Tibollo. I’ll actually send it by page Fraser over to the Premier in case he hasn’t seen it. In that letter, President Garry Pond said, “We have numerous veterans who are fearful of even applying for compensation knowing the Ontario provincial government will claw back their basic needs and shelter until the disability award is spent.”

The Legion says some veterans have literally ended up homeless after they unknowingly had their shelter allowance clawed back by this Premier. This absolutely must stop.

Why hasn’t the Premier done the right thing and stopped clawing back the disability award from our country’s proud veterans?

Mr. Jeremy Roberts: I’m pleased to speak a little bit further about our government’s reforms to the Soldiers’ Aid Commission. Along with expanding the Soldiers’ Aid Commission’s supports to all servicemen and -women, our government also understood that this program had been underfunded by previous governments. So we took action, and I’m pleased to say that we supported the expanded mandate and expanded the commission’s funding by about 600%, to $1.55 million per year.

Speaker, the Soldiers’ Aid Commission provides financial assistance for veterans and their families of up to $2,000 over a 12-month period per household. This can go to cover a number of different items, including health-related items like hearing aids, glasses, prescriptions, dental needs; home-related items like home repairs; specialized equipment like assistive devices, wheelchairs and prosthetics; personal items; and for the first time in Ontario’s history, employment-related supports.

This program is here for veterans. We’re expanding its mandate, and we’re increasing its funding, because our government—

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

The final supplementary.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Legion Ontario Command provincial president Garry Pond has asked the Premier to stop this cruel and disrespectful policy, and I agree with him. New Democrats agree that it has to stop. Veterans should be able to afford the basics, like food and shelter—not get their shelter and food allowances clawed back by this Ford government. Life is unaffordable under this Premier; we’ve already established that. We simply must ensure that veterans don’t become homeless because of their Ontario government’s policies of clawing back their benefits.

It should have been included, Speaker—I don’t disagree with the member that a great bill was passed yesterday. We supported it. This clawback ending should have been included in that bill that this House passed yesterday. That’s what should have happened.

Now the member for St. Catharines has put a motion on the table. We need to do the right thing. We need to get this done and get this done now.

Will this government pass that motion and commit to ending that clawback of benefits immediately? Give veterans the respect that they deserve.

Interjections.

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

To reply on behalf of the government, the Minister of Labour, Training and Skills Development.

Hon. Monte McNaughton: I want to tell the House and let all the MPPs know that because of the leadership of Premier Ford, we announced a partnership with a great organization called Helmets to Hardhats. We are working with the largest skilled trades unions in Ontario to help veterans, when they come back from serving Canadians overseas, to get mental health supports, to get housing supports, to get full training—

Ms. Andrea Horwath: They need food and shelter.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order.

Hon. Monte McNaughton: —and shelter and food, to get into these meaningful careers in the skilled trades. Because of the leadership of Premier Ford and our government, we’ve partnered to the tune of millions of dollars with Helmets to Hardhats, and I’m proud to say that 1,000 veterans are now on a pathway into a skilled trades job, making six figures with pensions and benefits. That’s how we’re making a difference—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m going to ask the official opposition to come to order.

The next question.

Government accountability / Responsabilité gouvernementale

Ms. Catherine Fife: My question is to the Premier. Yesterday, the Minister of Transportation dodged questions about her visit to the Silver Lakes country club in March. The visit occurred just one month before the Bradford Bypass route was altered. We now know the member from Willowdale’s family co-owns this property.

The province’s proposed route originally sliced through the second, third and 11th holes of the golf course. After this visit, the ministry revised this plan to one that avoids the golf course and instead runs through residential properties. No rationale for the change was provided.

If the minister has nothing to hide, then she should be able to answer this basic question—and I want the Premier to answer this question: Does he really expect Ontarians to believe that, while the minister and the member from Willowdale toured the golf property, the bypass project was never discussed and never came up? Will you tell the people of this province what happened at that golf course?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Again, I’ll ask members to make their comments through the Chair.

Premier.

Hon. Doug Ford: We’re a party that builds infrastructure, that builds highways, builds transit. By building the Bradford Bypass, we’re saving commuters, one way, 35 minutes, two ways, over an hour, so that they can spend time with their family. Everyone in the region wants it. The only person and people that don’t want it are the folks on the other side of the aisle.

People from York region, Simcoe county, Bradford, West Gwillimbury and East Gwillimbury—not only that. The most important people are the Holland Marsh Growers’ Association. Those are the people it matters to, because those are our hard-working farmers. The hard-working farmers that know they want to get their goods to market as soon as possible don’t want to be stuck in gridlock.

If it was up to the NDP and Liberals—they had 15 years to build this bypass; they didn’t do it. They didn’t do it because they do not believe in infrastructure. They don’t even believe in a cart and buggy going down the roads. They are against absolutely everything. They’re a party of no, no, no.

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

Ms. Catherine Fife: The issue here is ethics and it’s transparency. I understand that this Premier doesn’t get that.

At the time of their meeting at Silver Lakes, the member for Willowdale had not yet been promoted to cabinet. As the Toronto Star revealed on Sunday, he only declared a conflict of interest when he was promoted in June—two months after the bypass route was changed; three months after his meeting with the minister on the golf course.

The bypass and Highway 413 are already very problematic. The city of Barrie has requested a new environmental assessment, for instance.

Speaker, no one in Ontario believes the story that the minister just happened to show up at the precise location of the new Bradford Bypass on this golf course.

Why won’t the government release the data about why the route was changed? If you have a case for it, make it and share it with the people of this province, who are going to pay for the bypass and the highway just to save 30 seconds of their transport.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Once again, I’ll ask the members to make their comments through the Chair.

Minister of Transportation to respond.

L’hon. Caroline Mulroney: J’aimerais signaler à la membre de l’opposition que l’enjeu important pour le peuple de l’Ontario, c’est le problème d’embouteillages. C’est la congestion. C’est important pour les gens de la région de York, c’est important pour les gens de la région du comté de Simcoe, comme c’est important pour les gens de la région de Waterloo.

Dans cette Chambre en 2019, la membre de Waterloo a dit que le gouvernement Ford doit s’engager dans un plan concret et de terminer de faire le travail pour le jumelage de l’autoroute 7 entre Kitchener et Guelph. C’est clair, monsieur le Président, que pour les projets d’autoroutes et d’expansion d’autoroutes dans la circonscription de la membre de l’opposition, elle est très en faveur des autoroutes, mais pour les autoroutes dans le reste de la province, elle ne l’est pas.

Protection for workers

Mrs. Robin Martin: My question is to the Honourable Minister of Labour, Training and Skills Development. For too long in Ontario, underground operators have put workers at risk and disadvantaged those that follow the rules.

Under our government, we have closed a loophole that the Liberals knew about for years. They had a majority government for a while, and then were supported by the NDP, but no action was taken to protect workers from these bad apples.

Speaker, workers and advocates agree that there is more to be done to eliminate underground temporary help agency operators. Will the minister please explain what his plan is to increase workplace health and safety for vulnerable workers in Ontario?

Hon. Monte McNaughton: I want to thank the honourable member from Eglinton–Lawrence for her leadership on this issue. Speaker, I know that the member and I share the same goals as everyone else here in this chamber: We want to make sure every worker in Ontario comes home safe after a hard day’s work. That begins with ending the exploitation of workers.

I’m pleased to say we recently announced the most comprehensive plan in the country to protect vulnerable workers and honest employers. Our plan, if passed, would require agencies and recruiters to get a licence, pay a security bond and be listed on a public online database. This will send a clear signal that we will spare no expense to protect the health and safety of every single worker in the province, regardless of their passport status.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I look forward to the supplementary.

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

Mrs. Robin Martin: Thank you to the minister for that response. I’ve heard first-hand from the hard-working residents of my riding of Eglinton–Lawrence about the need to support strong actions, and our government needs to take strong actions to protect these vulnerable workers. As a government, I think we need to be decisive to stop these bad apples from flourishing while breaking the law.

So, Speaker, through you to the minister: What actions will our government take if a business does not properly register or if a business tries to use a non-registered temporary help agency?

Hon. Monte McNaughton: I would like to thank the member again for that very important question. Through you, Mr. Speaker, I can assure all of her constituents and the people of Ontario that we are taking decisive action to help vulnerable workers under the leadership of Premier Ford and our government. These workers are mostly young people, women and newcomers, who are being exploited by unscrupulous agencies.

Those who fail to get a licence or choose to use an unlicensed agency will face the highest fines in the country and possible jail time. We’re shining a light on lawbreakers and sending a clear message: Breaking the law is not a cost of doing business here in Ontario. If you’re not following rules, we can and we will shut you down.

Again, Mr. Speaker, everything that we’re doing under the leadership of Premier Ford is ensuring that workers have more take-home pay, that we protect workers and create more opportunities for every worker in this province.

Northern highway improvement / Amélioration d’autoroute dans le Nord

Mr. Jamie West: My question is for the Premier. There’s been a lot of conversation about the $1.5-billion four- to six-lane Bradford Bypass highway that the Premier is rushing through the greenbelt to reward his developer buddies. However, Speaker, that highway wasn’t even a topic for debate when the House rose last June.

Three years ago, in 2018, the Premier did promise the good people of Sudbury that he would complete the four-laning of Highway 69; however, three years later the same 68 kilometres is still untendered. That’s the same 68 kilometres that was untendered when the Liberal leader, Steven Del Duca, was the transportation minister.

Surely to goodness if the Premier can snap his fingers to push through the Bradford Bypass for his buddies, he can keep his promise to Sudbury and finish the four-laning of Highway 69. Speaker, will the Premier commit to tendering the final 68 kilometres of Highway 69? When will he finally get this done?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): To respond, the Minister of Transportation.

Hon. Caroline Mulroney: It’s hard to know where the opposition stands, as the Premier has said repeatedly today. Are they for highways or are they against highways?

Mr. Speaker, we are working very hard on behalf of people across Ontario to expand our highway system in the south and in the north, and I want to assure the member opposite that we’re working to widen Highway 69 between Parry Sound and Sudbury to four lanes to improve the safety and the operations of that highway; the widening of a 14-kilometre stretch of Highway 69 south of Alban; and the realignment of the Canadian National rail line at Highway 522. It is still ongoing. This is a $200-million investment, Mr. Speaker, in Highway 69. We’re continuing to do the important work on behalf of all Ontarians, but in particular, people in the north.

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

Mr. Jamie West: Back to the Premier: Sudbury is tired of broken promises. In 2003 the Liberals promised to complete the four-laning of Highway 69 by 2007. During the 2007 election they promised to complete it by 2013. Then, during the 2011 election, the Liberals promised they would complete Highway 69 by 2018. Then, during the 2018 election, the Conservative Party promised that they would finally complete what the Liberal Party and their transportation minister, Steven Del Duca, failed to get done: complete the four-laning of Highway 69. The good people of Sudbury have been incredibly patient.

However, it’s now 2021. When it comes to broken promises, it has been “Liberal, Tory, same old story” for nearly two decades.

My question is, will the Premier finally keep his promise to the people of Sudbury and tender the last 68 kilometres needed to complete the four-laning of Highway 69?

L’hon. Caroline Mulroney: Je remercie le membre de l’opposition d’avoir donné en détail la liste des promesses qui ont été non gardées par le gouvernement libéral précédent. La liste, elle est très longue, et c’est pour ça que notre gouvernement s’engage à faire le travail pour le peuple de l’Ontario qui est tellement nécessaire, dans le Nord comme dans le Sud.

Pour ce qu’il y a des 68 kilomètres qui restent pour l’autoroute 69 : le ministère est en train de travailler sur les 68 kilomètres qui restent. Il y a du travail en génie qui est nécessaire et on doit acquérir certaines propriétés. Notre gouvernement s’engage à l’expansion de notre système d’autoroute à travers la province, et c’est quelque chose que le gouvernement précédent n’a pas fait.

Child care

Ms. Mitzie Hunter: My question is to the Premier. We’ve watched this government continue to flip-flop, but now you’re starting to do some of the right things. You have reversed your position on electric vehicles. You have finally agreed to the minimum wage. You’re actually adopting some very important Liberal policies.

Some might say it’s never too late to do the right thing. The same is true when it comes to providing Ontarians with affordable child care. A $1 investment in child care will get a $1.50-to-$2 return. It will increase labour force participation, especially amongst women, and increase the GDP and, ultimately, revenues to the province. But more importantly, it’s the right thing to do.

My question to this Premier: Tomorrow, this chamber will hear his fall economic statement. It’s not too late to include affordable child care. Will the Premier announce tomorrow that he is signing the federal agreement on $10-a-day child care?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): To respond, the Minister of Education.

Hon. Stephen Lecce: The government has continued to invest in affordable child care—really, cleaning up the mess of the former Liberal government, where child care rose by 40% for working parents. That’s absolutely unacceptable by any measurement, yet the member opposite champions the legacy of neglect when it comes to building schools and when it comes to child care affordability.

This Premier, in his first budget, allocated $2 billion every single year to build new child care spaces—30,000 spaces—$1 billion of capital investment, a tax credit to make life more affordable for working parents.

But we do agree there’s a role for the federal government to step up their investment. They currently pay 2.5% of Ontario’s share of child care; we think they could do much more. Unlike the provincial Liberals, who would have caved to the federal Liberal government on the child care deal, this Premier is standing strong for the best possible deal, a sustainable long-term agreement that ensures child care is affordable for families now and well into the future.

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

Ms. Mitzie Hunter: Back to the Premier: Women and families in my riding of Scarborough–Guildwood are facing tough choices as they struggle to find child care and hold on to their jobs. Participation rates among women in the core age group is falling in this province.

Speaker, the YMCAs across our province and our country have written to the Premier, calling for concrete steps to tackle the she-cession and to promote a she-covery. The letter that they sent to the Premier said, “This economic crisis requires transformative intervention. Task forces and tax credits are not enough.”

If the Premier wants to do the right thing for women in this province, then it is time for him to join the seven other provinces and one territory and sign on to the federal government’s $10-a-day child care in Ontario so families can feel that relief.

I’ve been working with the East Scarborough Boys and Girls Club in my riding of Scarborough–Guildwood to find solutions to close this gap. Women in Scarborough cannot fight this inequity and the she-cession alone. They need help from their government.

Will this Premier sign this agreement today and stop delaying?

Hon. Stephen Lecce: Thank you to the member opposite for the question again. She noted that other provinces have signed deals. Overwhelmingly, all of those provinces—the vast majority—do not have a full-day kindergarten program providing full-time, subsidized care for four- and five-year-olds.

So for the $3.6 billion of investment that the provincial Liberals under Steven Del Duca would have left on the table, our government, our Premier and this Progressive Conservative Party are saying to the federal government that we want a better deal that actually acknowledges the unique investments this province makes when it comes to quality child care. We want a long-term deal, not a five-year commitment that then ends with a massive spike in costs for the parents we all represent. We want a sustainable program, a long-term investment and more investment from the feds, who are shortchanging the people of this province.

Veterans

Mr. Lorne Coe: My question is to the Minister of Children, Community and Social Services. Our veterans have made a tremendous sacrifice to make Canada and the province what they are today. As we go back to the cenotaphs and Legions in our ridings, we all see that what a veteran looks like has changed. World War II veterans are mostly in their nineties, and Korean War vets are mostly in their eighties. And now, Speaker, most veterans you see on the 11th are from peacekeeping missions in Afghanistan.

I know that I speak for all members when I say that we’re grateful, absolutely grateful, to all veterans for their service. So Speaker, my question is: After veterans have done so much for us, what is this government doing to support our veterans, to show that our province is thankful for their service?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Ottawa West–Nepean to respond on behalf of the government.

Mr. Jeremy Roberts: Thank you to the member from Whitby for this question. I want to start by really commending the member for Whitby. All of us here know that he has been a tremendously fierce advocate for veterans throughout his career in public service, and we thank him for his continued advocacy.

Our veterans have put so much on the line to ensure that our country and our province are free and secure. That’s why our government passed a new law last year to expand the Soldiers’ Aid Commission’s program to include all Ontario veterans and their families, regardless of when and where they served. Previously, the mandate extended only to veterans of the Korean War and before.

This was the first meaningful change in their mandate after years of neglect by the previous government, which saw the commission’s financial assistance constrained to a very limited group of former servicemen and -women. I’m pleased to add that, to support the expanded mandate, the commission’s funding has been increased by about 600%, to $1.5 million each year, resulting in up to $2,000 a year per household.

I’m pleased to speak further in the supplementary.

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

Mr. Lorne Coe: Thank you to the parliamentary assistant for his answer and for explaining the government’s actions in supporting our veterans. This increase in funding is so well deserved and needed for Ontario’s veterans, and expanding the commission’s mandate to younger veterans who fought for our country is so long overdue.

Connecting veterans to financial assistance is a clear way we can show that we will never forget their sacrifice, Speaker—never forget. Can the minister tell us what the increased supports through the Soldiers’ Aid Commission program will look like for Ontario’s veterans?

Mr. Jeremy Roberts: Thank you to the member from Whitby for that supplemental question.

The Soldiers’ Aid Commission program provides financial assistance for veterans and their families of up to $2,000 over a 12-month period per household for health-related items like hearing aids, glasses, prescription and dental needs; home-related items like repairs, moving costs, furniture, replacement or repair of roof and furnace; specialized equipment like assistive devices, wheelchairs and prosthetics; personal items; and employment-related supports, for the first time in Ontario history.

Knowing the importance of this work, our government expanded the Soldiers’ Aid Commission’s mandate to apply to all Ontario’s veterans. While we will never forget the bravery and sacrifice of veterans of our two world wars and of Korea, it is time that we honour a new generation of servicemen and -women. Our government is committed to continuing to support our veterans and looks forward to continuing to do that moving forward.

Water quality

Mr. Sol Mamakwa: Remarks in Oji-Cree.

My question is to the Premier. We may not think of Ajax as treaty territory, but it is. Without treaties, there would be no Ontario, no Canada. The Carruthers Creek headwaters form a vital ecosystem that supports Ajax with clean air and water, and provides flood protection in a time of increased flood risk due to climate change.

Jeff Forbes, councillor for Mississaugas of Scugog Island First Nation, has said, “It’s important to protect the headwaters. What changes now will have devastating consequences for our future generations.”

What is Ontario doing to ensure this area is protected for future generations?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): To reply on behalf of the government, the member for Barrie–Innisfil and parliamentary assistant.

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: I thank that member for raising that issue. I appreciate his advocacy every step of the way when he does bring up these issues. With all due respect to that member, he knows that we in the province of Ontario do constantly collaborate with our federal counterparts when it comes to supporting resolutions and long-term solutions for drinking water, especially drinking water advisories, and support long, sustainable solutions for these communities across Ontario so that we can build that infrastructure.

In terms of Ontario and in the Ontario Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks, we’ve been working with and through the Indigenous Drinking Water Projects Office, and we’ve worked with the Ontario Clean Water Agency and the Walkerton Clean Water Centre, to provide First Nations communities with access to provincial expertise and the design, construction, operation and maintenance of drinking water systems.

I also met with Water First, which is doing a lot of great work throughout this province with the support of this government.

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

Mr. Sol Mamakwa: Meegwetch. The duty to consult Indigenous peoples on crown conduct that may affect them is essential in protecting Aboriginal and treaty rights. This is recognized and affirmed by the Constitution.

The Mississaugas of Scugog Island First Nation have stated there is a need for consultation here. They want a balanced approach that respects Indigenous peoples and the lands as well as the environment. Without proper consultation, we ignore the legal and democratic process. And we destroy what little undeveloped land is left in this area, leaving none for future generations.

Will Ontario honour its duty to consult and listen to the Indigenous people who are trying to protect the headwaters?

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: I’ll reiterate our government’s commitment to working and partnering with our First Nations communities to resolve any issues regarding water quality and drinking water on reserves and calling on the federal government to fully take responsibility when it comes to safe drinking water.

As I mentioned earlier, we’ve been working with our First Nation partners and other agencies like, for example, the Ontario Clean Water Agency, which has worked over the past 10 years with many First Nations communities. For instance, we have the Chippewas of Nawash, who have been on this committee and who have been helping; Dokis First Nation; Curve Lake First Nation; Henvey Inlet First Nation; Long Lake; Anishinaabe First Nation; Algonquins of Greater Golden Lake First Nation—I could go on, Speaker.

We also have others who have served and we’ve consulted with in terms of the clean water agencies, as well, in many First Nations; for example, Big Grassy, Brunswick House, Cape Croker and many more.

COVID-19 immunization

Mr. Roman Baber: My question is to the Minister of Health. Two weeks ago, I asked the minister if she will dispel the false and hateful proposition that the unvaccinated put any lives at risk. The minister said that, in fact, the unvaccinated do put lives at risk. Now, I submit that such a statement may lead to detestation of an unidentifiable group of people and should be avoided in this House.

Speaker, the daily new case numbers are now approaching fifty-fifty, but now we learn, by memo of August 31, that the Chief Medical Officer of Health told Ontario’s medical officers and the assistant deputy minister that the vaccinated have similar levels of infectiousness as the unvaccinated, and recommended additional measures. I note that the memo predates Ontario’s announcement of vaccine passports, which means they aren’t based in science.

I’ll ask the minister again: Will she concede that the vaccinated transmit just as easily as the unvaccinated, and will she apologize for the discrimination promoted by this government?

Hon. Christine Elliott: There is a lot there to deal with. What I would say is the Chief Medical Officer of Health and our government have always said from the beginning, as soon as the vaccination became available, that the best way to protect yourself, your loved ones and your communities is to be vaccinated—absolutely. The numbers are showing that that is the case. We had high levels during wave 3, but as more and more Ontarians are vaccinated we’re finding that the numbers are dropping.

Currently, today, we have 88.2% of all Ontarians aged 12 years and older having received a first dose of the vaccine and 84.6% having received the second dose. That’s one of the highest rates in the world. In addition to that, the numbers in ICU today are 137, which is 112 from Ontario and 25 people from Saskatchewan, which Ontario is helping out because they’re going through a very difficult time.

The facts state the case. What is happening is more and more people are being vaccinated, our numbers are going down and the numbers in our ICU are going down as well—

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

The supplementary?

Mr. Roman Baber: The Minister fails to make the distinction. Yes, the vaccine is good at protecting one’s self, but it doesn’t mean that a person who is unvaccinated is putting anyone else at risk, more so than a vaccinated person. That’s what the August 31 memo from the chief medical officer states, in which he proposes additional measures against those who are vaccinated.

For 20 months, the government denied science by refusing to acknowledge natural immunity. This is despite giving government members a pass from vaccination if they can show antibodies, by memo of August 18. While the government insisted that the earth is flat, thousands of Ontarians lost their jobs and thousands are about to lose their job despite having had COVID-19 and having COVID antibodies.

Finally, last Thursday, the chief medical officer stopped denying science and admitted that one can build immunity to the virus through natural exposure.

My question to the Minister of Health: Will she acknowledge the existence of natural immunity on behalf of the government, and why should Ontarians who had COVID or have antibodies to COVID lose their job because of their medical choice?

Hon. Christine Elliott: This government has been making decisions based on science and clinical evidence since the beginning of this pandemic. Dr. Moore has also indicated that this pandemic is now a pandemic of the unvaccinated. It is absolutely essential for people to receive the vaccination. Sure, if someone has had COVID there are some antibodies, but they’re not sufficient to protect that person and to protect others. Vaccination is the key, as well as the other public health and precautionary measures that we’ve taken, including ventilation, social distancing, masking and all those other mechanisms.

Essentially, this comes down to the need for as many people as possible to be vaccinated, and I urge everyone in Ontario who has not yet been vaccinated to please do so. It will save your life, it will protect your loved ones and it will protect your community.

Digital government

Mr. Sheref Sabawy: Some jurisdictions have committed to providing digital solutions and offer government services available online. When it comes to Ontario’s reputation, there is no question how important it is that we continue to lead the world when it comes to health care, protecting workers and building infrastructure. It is now more important than ever to make sure we are a leader in digital government.

To the first-ever Associate Minister of Digital Government: How do you plan to ensure that Ontario lights the path for future generations to come?

Hon. Kaleed Rasheed: Thank you to the member for Mississauga–Erin Mills for the question and for his great work with his constituents.

We are committed to being a digital leader in Canada and the world. For example, we have shown that we are up to the task with the successful rollout of the Verify Ontario app for businesses. The app has been downloaded more than 1.3 million times and seen over 3.2 million scans of the official QR code. Not only that, but over seven million Ontarians have already downloaded the QR code.

By offering the app code on ope