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

March 28, 2017

41st Parliament, 2nd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2017-Mar-28 (PDF)

L059 - Tue 28 Mar 2017 / Mar 28 mar 2017

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Tuesday 28 March 2017 Mardi 28 mars 2017

Orders of the Day

Supply Act, 2017 / Loi de crédits de 2017

Introduction of Visitors

Oral Questions

Privatization of public assets

Government advertising

Hydro rates

Privatization of public assets

GO Transit

Hospital funding

Sexual abuse

Mental health services

Employment standards

Volunteers

Hospital services

Ring of Fire

Clean technology

School closures

Assisted housing

Financial literacy

Members’ Statements

Pharmacists

WEareABLE Windsor-Essex

Meals on Wheels

Elmira Maple Syrup Festival

Anti-racism activities

Sheridan College

Corbyn Smith

Canada Summer Games

Belmore Maple Syrup Festival

Reports by Committees

Standing Committee on Government Agencies

Statements by the Ministry and Responses

Canadian Agricultural Safety Week

Petitions

Persons with communication disabilities

Primary health care

Road safety

Agri-food industry

Hydro rates

Nanjing Massacre

Water fluoridation

Soins de longue durée

Home inspection industry

Hydro rates

Grandview Children’s Centre

Opposition Day

Hydro rates

Private members’ public business

Adjournment Debate

Hydro rates

The House met at 0900.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Good morning. Please join me in prayer.

Prayers.

Orders of the Day

Supply Act, 2017 / Loi de crédits de 2017

Mrs. Sandals moved second reading of the following bill:

Bill 111,

An Act to authorize the expenditure of certain amounts for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2017 / Projet de loi 111, Loi autorisant l’utilisation de certaines sommes pour l’exercice se terminant le 31 mars 2017.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The President of the Treasury Board.

Hon. Liz Sandals: I’m pleased to rise in the House today to discuss the Supply Act for the 2016-17 fiscal year. The Supply Act is a key step in the province’s annual fiscal cycle. If passed by this House, this would constitute the final approval by this assembly of government and legislative offices’ program spending for the fiscal year that ends March 31, 2017.

Let me note that the Supply Act would not authorize any new expenditures; all expenditures to be approved are in accordance with the 2016-17 estimates and supplementary estimates that were presented to the House for the current fiscal year.

I will just briefly touch on the estimates process to refresh members’ minds of why the debate on the Supply Act is so important. The estimates set out a comprehensive account of the government’s intended expenditures for the fiscal year and include details of the spending plans that were presented in the 2016 budget, Jobs for Today and Tomorrow. Some of these estimates are chosen for more in-depth scrutiny by the Standing Committee on Estimates, and, this year, nine ministries and offices were selected.

They were carefully reviewed by the standing committee before they were returned to the House and a vote of concurrence in the estimates was held to make sure that the Legislature agreed with the report from the committee. Any estimates from ministries not called to the standing committee and from all legislative offices were also given concurrence. The Legislature gave its concurrence to the 2016-17 estimates this past Thursday. Concurrence allows us to move onto the Supply Act, which we are discussing today.

The Supply Act, if passed, would provide necessary legal spending authority for government programs that have been building Ontario up and transforming Ontario for the future. That includes spending on priorities like education, health care and infrastructure. It includes spending that is helping grow Ontario’s economy and move our province forward. That is why it is so important to pass the Supply Act.

I’d like to begin with our economic picture. Ontario, like many other places in the world, was affected deeply by the global economic recession of 2008-09. We faced that challenge by choosing to improve schools, strengthen health care and invest in modern infrastructure.

Once again, we have beaten the deficit target in our budget projection. We had originally projected a deficit of $4.3 billion, but based on strong economic growth and a responsible approach to fiscal management, our deficit is at only $1.9 billion this year. Speaker, we are well on our way to meeting our promise to balance the budget by 2017-18.

Our unemployment rate is down to 6.2%, which is the lowest in 10 years. Since the recessionary low, we have added an additional 702,000 jobs. Of those new jobs, nearly 95% are full-time and over 78% pay a wage above the average wage. What’s more, over 75% of those new jobs are in the private sector. This February was our seventh consecutive month in a row for job growth, a number we haven’t seen for 14 years.

All of this has put us at the top of the G7 in terms of economic growth, and we can truly be proud of this leadership role. Our government has worked hard to drive that economic growth, investing $3.1 billion since 2004 and leveraging over $31 billion—investments that have created and retained over 175,000 jobs. Our regional development funds have invested over $145 million for an impact of nearly 35,000 jobs.

For example, our Eastern Ontario Development Fund, or the EODF, has leveraged $410 million in investments for 7,000 jobs and our Southwestern Ontario Development Fund, or SWODF, has leveraged $1.3 billion in investments for over 28,000 jobs. Even with all of these encouraging economic figures and past success, we cannot pause or we might allow our global competitors to get ahead of us. Our plan to build Ontario up must continue.

One of the major ways we are moving forward are our investments in critical infrastructure. By investing more than $160 billion over 12 years, which started in 2014-15, we are moving Ontario forward by building tomorrow’s infrastructure now. Our plan includes an investment of $55 billion in public transit infrastructure over 10 years.

In a few years, many Ontarians will have more travel options thanks to our investments. On the ground, in the greater Toronto and Hamilton area, that means new LRTs and expanded GO Transit services. We’re investing in improvements to our highways, improving the 401, the 407 East extension and the expansion of Highway 69 between Sudbury and Parry Sound. In total, we are investing $26 billion in highways over 10 years, and we are building and repairing roads, bridges and other critical infrastructure.

All of these investments benefit Ontarians and the economy. Improving our roads and our transit helps connect our people. For a business owner, it means that the parts they need to manufacture their products can be shipped faster and more reliably, making sure that they arrive on time and allowing them to be more efficient. Once those products are manufactured, it will help ship them out to buyers across Ontario and around the world. Investing in moving Ontarians is an investment in our economy and our communities. It brings us together and has a direct impact on all of our lives.

In addition to growing the economy through investment, our government understands that there are other ways that we can stimulate growth. For example, global firm McKinsey and Co. estimates that open data can help generate more than $3 trillion a year in key sectors of the global economy—and that’s a global figure. Obviously, that’s not the Ontario figure.

One of the things that falls under my office of Treasury Board Secretariat is the Open Data initiative. The Open Data initiative presents Ontario with a fiscal opportunity, in addition to the moral imperative, of creating a more open, accountable and transparent government. That means being as open and transparent as possible with our data, with information, and it means trying to engage with Ontarians about their government.

One way that we are being more open in government is providing Ontarians with the data that they believe should be publicly available. Our government engaged the public, asking them to vote online on what data sets our government should open to the public.

As a result of that, we have either released or begun the process of releasing the top 25 data sets that Ontarians requested. These data sets include both the well-known public sector salary disclosure, better known as the sunshine list—which is now available electronically as opposed to just that big, fat paper document that you used to get—and also data sets that might be a little bit more obscure, like the average car travel speeds from 2011, which were calculated using GPS data collected by a mobile smart phone application. These are just two of 560 open data sets that are available for download from our website.

Other data sets are being used in really interesting ways. For example, the Gridwatch app uses Ontario’s open data on power generation to help show where Ontario’s power comes from and when the grid is or isn’t using clean energy. Another example is the WaterTAP organization that uses Ontario data to assess the cost savings potential of water solutions to help keep Ontario’s water sector prospering. University of Toronto students are using our open data sets in their technologies for knowledge media design course, which has students investigating how to use open data to improve public engagement in Ontario.

We are focused through this process on providing Ontarians with more access to high value data and information that supports innovation and strengthens public policy. It also promotes fiscal oversight through transparency as we post travel, meal and hospitality expenses claimed by cabinet ministers, parliamentary assistants, political staff and senior government employees online.

As the open government movement has gained momentum around the world, we have joined with 69 other countries in the Open Government Partnership to ensure that we are held accountable for the commitments we make to open government.

Another way that Ontarians are engaged informs the budget through taking a digital approach to pre-budget consultations. This year, more than 81,400 people participated in consultations, which broke the record for engagement that was set last year. More than 400 project ideas were submitted online, and $3 million in funding will be provided to fund up to eight of those proposals. The proposals are chosen by people voting online. This makes Ontario the first province in Canada to commit to funding ideas that came from the public as part of the budget process.

The benefits of open data are enormous. Citizens and businesses can use unlocked government data to find solutions that help people in their everyday lives and create innovative applications to grow Ontario’s economy. One of my personal favourites is the real estate app that takes data that is available about a property from a whole bunch of government data sets and consolidates it.

Through this app you can key in the location of the property and get all the information about that property: technical information about the location, but also all sorts of information about new zoning proposals, liens—any data the government would hold about the property, all in one place. I find that that’s very popular with developers and people in the real estate industry. That’s a case where a private company has used government data to develop an app which is useful to a particular sector of Ontario’s economy.

We’re committed to engaging the public on how government works going forward and to being open and transparent in all aspects of government. We want to open our doors and explore more ways to lead the most open, transparent and accountable government in the country.

We’re making crucial investments in fostering a more innovative and dynamic business environment. We have invested in innovative and forward-looking companies across Ontario, including those in the technology centre. To use a local example in my riding of Guelph, our government’s Southwestern Ontario Development Fund has invested over $6.3 million into new equipment, new capacity and in the creation of over 1,500 Guelph jobs since 2013—investments like our investment in Teutech Industries.

Teutech manufactures and assembles parts for the automotive sector. With our $1 million in support, Teutech is developing equipment to prepare for increased demand and design changes in the automotive sector. Our $1 million in support has leveraged more than $9 million from the company, and the project has a total value of more than $10 million and is expected to be completed in September 2020.

Earlier this month, I was in nearby Elora to announce $2.5 million in support for Polycorp, a leading Canadian designer and manufacturer of rubber products that reduce the risk of corrosion, among other things. That investment leveraged an additional $14.5 million from the company, and it will create and retain over 150 jobs in the Elora area.

Investments in businesses like Teutech and like Polycorp are a critical part of how our government is building southwestern Ontario up and how we are delivering our number one priority: to grow the economy and create jobs.

In tandem with investments like this in capacity building and in public infrastructure, we’re also investing in talent and skills, helping more people get and create the jobs of the future by expanding access to high-quality college and university education. We have made a massive transformation to student assistance.

Starting in September 2017, students in financial need—that is, whose family income is $50,000 per year or less—will receive the average cost of tuition free. This is a major change for students in financial need enrolled at the University of Guelph in my riding or at any other post-secondary education institution across Ontario. We estimate that by transforming the way we fund students, over 150,000 students across the province will have free average tuition.

There could be a student out there with enormous potential who just happens to be born into a family whose parents never enrolled in post-secondary education. They are working to get ahead, but there just isn’t enough money to pay for their children’s tuition, even though the child may want to go to university. Rather than put the burden of student loans on the family, now we are being very up front about the cost. We are able to say, “You can go to school, and this is how much you will pay.”

This is all possible by reorganizing the way we allocate the funding that was already available. Instead of giving it back after the fact, through tax credits or retroactive grants, we can say right away, before you enrol, “This is your situation and this is the funding that you will receive.” It’s changes like this that remove financial barriers that might have pushed people away from post-secondary education.

We are removing a major hurdle that could have kept too many people from their dreams. Now that young person can go to university and become the engineer that designs the new bridge in her hometown or become the city planner that reorganizes the way transit works in Thunder Bay. They might design a new and more efficient way to manufacture parts. They might do research that saves lives through medicine, or study computer science and build the next big app that everyone has on their phone.

For the average Ontarian, our tuition plan will help open the door to jobs that will build the future of Ontario, along with the higher wages that education brings to the individual. Beyond individuals benefiting, Ontario as a whole will benefit. Having a highly educated workforce brings investment from companies looking for employees who will be able to handle the challenges of a globalized economy.

Our tuition promise is just one way that we are helping Ontarians while building the economy of the future. We’re also redesigning our digital services to support OSAP applicants. By redesigning OSAP—that is the student assistance program—for the digital age, we’re making it more focused on the user. We built a new calculator on the application website that will help students and their families find out quickly and easily whether they qualify for free tuition or other grants and support from the province before they begin their applications.

Have a visit to Ontario.ca, check the OSAP

section and you, too, can plug in your data and find out what your support would be for your particular circumstances. Whether at home or on the train, or at school, or at work, applicants will be able to check on the status of their financial assistance and they will be able to eventually apply for detailed assistance online once they get their acceptance from their post-secondary institutions.

These investments in transforming education and expanding access to post-secondary education are part of our government’s plan to create jobs, grow our economy and continue to help people in their everyday lives.

The investments I’ve outlined are just a few examples of how we have supported Ontarians through our budget. The estimates and the Supply Act are much more than just numbers on a page—they’re an indication of our commitment to build Ontario up and to do so in a fiscally responsible way. Each line represents an investment in Ontarians and in the future of Ontario.

Speaker, before I conclude, I would like to remind members of the importance of the Supply Act. Passing the Supply Act and granting the legal authority for government spending from the past fiscal year is not about approving new spending, it is about ensuring that the government finances its programs and honours its commitments. It’s more than approving numbers on a line, it’s about improving transit so that families can get to work or, on a holiday, to visit the Hockey Hall of Fame—or go to a Sens game, for those in the Ottawa area.

It’s so we can travel to the beautiful places in this province, like Eagle-Dogtooth Provincial Park near Kenora, and it’s about helping people get a post-secondary education, if they want one, without having to worry about the cost.

It’s about being more open and transparent, as well as more efficient and effective in government. It’s about approving spending on priorities that matter to all Ontarians, like creating good jobs, building a more innovative and sustainable economy, and investing in infrastructure to ensure that our economy and our people are more competitive in the future.

It’s about approving government spending that has been transforming Ontario for the future, so I urge all members to support the Supply Act so that spending on these critical public services can be authorized for the fiscal year.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Further debate?

Ms. Lisa MacLeod: It’s my pleasure today to rise in debate on the issue of supply and the Supply Act; the Supply Act talks about the intended expenditures, giving the government spending authority—and we will obviously vote on this later on—and to talk about the priorities of the Liberal government. But I’m going to take time to talk about the priorities of my constituents in Nepean–Carleton, specifically those who live in rural Ottawa. They have seen their fair share of challenges since I was elected in 2006. Some of the issues that they’ve raised are very much on their minds—each and every day in the Ontario Legislature.

I want to start by talking about an issue that I raised in the Legislature just yesterday. It was the Lynnwood park water quality issue. I raised it; I’m very passionate about it. I’ve been working with my constituents for a number of years, trying to improve their water quality. I’ve had motions in the finance committee, motions at Ottawa city hall. I’ve written letters to ministers. I brought, for example, the former Environmental Commissioner, Gord Miller, to this rural mobile home park.

The problem with the water quality there is not only is it a poor aesthetic—it looks very bad. We have water here; it’s very clear. The water at Lynnwood is brown. It sometimes has a golden tint to it. It’s not only aesthetically displeasing, it is not potable, so it’s not fit for human consumption. On occasion, I have gone into one of the mobile homes there—I think there are 51 units—and I saw that the taps were actually corroded. Can you believe that, Speaker? I always point out to people that I live in the nation’s capital. We are the nation’s capital of a G8 country, and we actually have Third World water quality at Lynnwood mobile home park.

When I raised this issue yesterday and I said that company that owns that mobile home park should be publicly shamed—their name is Killam Properties in Nova Scotia—no sooner did I have my statement, but I got up to my office and heard that Killam Properties had called me and they said, “Well, the MPP didn’t do her job.” We provided them with this long list of things that I had done over the years with then-city councillor Doug Thompson and now-city councillor George Darouze, and we talked about all of the things that we tried to do, including using the trickle system at Carlsbad Springs and trying to get the municipal and provincial governments in Russell, Ontario, and our federal government to open up an agreement with the municipality of Russell to hook into one of their water pipes that was going through the city of Ottawa.

Of course, that wasn’t an option. I’ve been working on this for many, many years, and still, my constituents have Third World water quality. Until this Killam Properties was mentioned in the Ontario Legislature yesterday, they were happy to have this poor water quality.

I was on the phone with my husband this morning and we were talking about this group of wealthy individuals from Halifax and Dartmouth and how they’re all involved in the board of directors of various charities. I thought, “Wouldn’t it be interesting if I sent a vial of water to each and every one of their charities and said, ‘Look at what they’re actually doing in the nation’s capital’?”

I suspect they must have somebody who does PR for them watching this as they did yesterday in order to call me, but I assure them that I will stand in my place on this floor of the assembly with this microphone and this podium that I have and I will defend the people who I represent. I know I will not be representing them after 2018 because my riding will split—I will run in the newly created Nepean riding; that’s where I live—but I can tell you, I’m always going to defend the people of Lynnwood mobile home park because they deserve it. That is affordable housing.

I want to talk a little bit about hydro, and hydro is next. I have been to this mobile home park and I have been with seniors there in the middle of winter—minus 30 degrees outside in Ottawa—it was very cold. I was visiting with seniors there and they couldn’t even turn on their lights or their heat in the daytime because they couldn’t afford it because of the government’s time-of-use. I feel that these folks have been abandoned by the Liberal government of Ontario. Whether we’re talking supply or budget or energy policy, they’ve been let down, and they’ve been let down by Killam Properties.

I look forward to getting another call from their president today chastising me. But that, as my husband would say and my late father would remind them, is probably not a good idea.

I want to move on to some of the other challenges that rural Ottawa faces. In particular, I want to talk about something I had the opportunity to speak about last week in the Ontario Legislature, right here, and engaged in a debate with the Minister of Energy. That is the high cost to those who own greenhouses and farms and who are involved in agri-food in the province of Ontario. Speaker, we can talk about this—you and I have chatted about this. It’s a significant issue for our food security in the province of Ontario and the ability for our farmers to compete at market.

I’m not talking about the New York market; I’m talking about the market in the city of Ottawa and other places in Ontario.

As I mentioned in the Legislature last week, my friend Bob Mitchell owns a company called SunTech Greenhouses. His main products are these tomatoes. They’re called the “little miracles from Manotick.” Anybody who has ever lived in Ottawa or is from eastern Ontario knows this.

Mr. Steve Clark: They’re delicious.

Ms. Lisa MacLeod: They’re delicious. They’re in Farm Boy. They’re in all of the different supermarkets in the city of Ottawa. Lowell Green used to be the public voice of these little miracles from Manotick.

Bob is working through high energy prices, was unable to run his lights this winter, and he finds that his product, side-by-side with a Mexican tomato or a cucumber from Mexico, is 30% more expensive. We’re pricing him out of the market as a result of high energy prices. If the government wants to talk about its intended expenditures, it has got to consider how their energy policy is driving Ontario business down. That’s not just Ontario businesses, it’s also our food supply.

For anybody who wants to support our farmers, they ought to understand the burden that we put on them, which is the green energy tax, which is the Green Energy Act. It is the HST which has come in under this government. There was the neonics ban, there was the pesticide ban; now we’ve got high hydro rates that are just driving Ontario businesses and, in particular, Ontario farmers into very stressful situations. They’re also major employers.

Another major employer in rural Ottawa is my friend Fernando. He owns Carleton Mushroom. I’m out there all the time. He and his wife, Stacey, have become friends of mine over the past decade. Fernando needs natural gas access. The government has been promising to expand natural gas into rural areas across Ontario. To date, they haven’t done so, and it will come at a high cost for Fernando. In order for him to expand—I believe he has 120 employees. If he were to expand, he would need natural gas, and that would come at the tune of about $2 million.

If the government wants rural Ottawa and rural businesses, in particular those who are part of our food supply chain, to succeed, what they need to do is expand natural gas in those areas. I am very much in favour of that in the Osgoode ward of the city of Ottawa.

Not only Fernando, but there are a couple of other businesses on Dalmeny Road that would benefit from having natural gas. I’m thinking of Petersen’s Turf Farm. A lot of people from eastern Ontario will know the jingle, “Petersen’s Turf Farm, Petersen with a T.” I know all these jingles, but I’m very much in favour of the Petersens getting access to natural gas, and a couple of other areas.

Finally, I just want to talk about my friend Dwight Foster. Dwight has been a friend and supporter of mine for over 11 years. I’ve taken my good colleague Mr. Hardeman from Oxford to some of the farms in rural Ottawa, in particular to see a robotic milker just outside of where Dwight is from. The thing is, Dwight is running the largest grain elevator in eastern Ontario: North Gower Grains, it’s called. His brother also runs a farm. Many people in eastern Ontario would get their corn and perhaps even their strawberries and pumpkins from my friends the Fosters. The high cost of energy is really hurting my friends in the agricultural sector.

Again, I want to reiterate that I will be their MPP for another 18 months. If, God willing, I’m re-elected to Nepean, my friends in the Lynnwood mobile home park and in the agricultural community in Carleton will always have a defender in me. I will use my last 16 or 18 months here as their MPP advocating for them, but when I am returned, I will continue to do it, because they are good people. They follow the rules. They pay their taxes. They contribute to their economy. What do they get in return from this Liberal government: this Liberal budget, this Liberal supply measure that does nothing to benefit them?

I want to point out: Many of these people were supporters of the Rideau Carleton Raceway. In 2012, this government decided to destroy the horse racing sector in the province of Ontario. I fought like the dickens because I believe in these people.

These people are the bread and butter; they are the employers and employees in rural Ottawa. Many people think, “Ottawa: Parliament Hill, beautiful buildings.” Well, that’s not just who we are. That’s a segment of who we are, but there’s a whole Ottawa outside of downtown Ottawa. I represent it, and the people that I represent are good people.

I was out at the racetrack just the other day, and they’re having a difficult time. We’re seeing less and less races and a smaller and smaller pot. Just last week I met with some members of the Ontario Harness Horse Association. You know what they’re telling me? It’s harder and harder and harder for them to not even continue to compete but to get people to join up. It has fallen on deaf ears—the ability to have this industry in the province of Ontario, as a result of what happened in 2012.

You’ll recall that I stood here in this assembly. I filled these galleries with horse people. People even took a bus from the city of Ottawa just to come up to hear that debate, to tell the government to stop its modernization plan and keep those racetracks where they are. Although Rideau Carleton Raceway remains, pots are down, races are down and it’s becoming more difficult for not only breeders and not only riders, but also for the businesses that are supported by that racetrack. I’ll continue to defend them, because they’re good people.

They never thought they would ever have to engage in politics until the Liberal government came and stripped away their livelihood. To me, if we want to talk about the intended expenditures of this government, I’m going to continue to say that it’s wrong-headed.

I’ll give you another example. The Osgoode Care Centre is the only rural long-term-care facility in the city of Ottawa. It has people from Winchester who will come to it, and there might be some folks from downtown Ottawa, but primarily it is intended for people who live in the Osgoode and Rideau former municipalities that have since been amalgamated. They’re going to have to upgrade their long-term-care facility. They’re upgrading the beds. In order to do that, that’s going to cost millions of dollars, with, of course, as we talked about intended expenditure, no money from the provincial government.

It’s different when you’re talking about an urban area with lots of businesses, a lot of corporate money, a lot of development dollars, where people are going to invest in that, put their name on it. It’s very difficult when you’re looking at the population of one of the smallest wards in the city of Ottawa, and, in some cases, smaller than some municipalities outside of the region. It’s very hard for them to raise that money. They’re doing their darndest, Speaker. I go there all the time. They’re always fundraising; they’re always trying to leverage what they can.

I don’t recognize in this supply motion anything that will assist those seniors who require assistance at the Osgoode Care Centre.

The people of the Osgoode Care Centre are just wonderful people. They have contributed to our community. They’re very philanthropic. They really believe in what they’re doing, and I believe in what they’re doing. Unfortunately, in this supply motion, there is no recognition of that. Nor, Speaker, is there any recognition, I expect, in the forthcoming Ontario budget, which the minister herself indicated is still going to see a deficit.

I wanted to support those at the Osgoode Care Centre. I will reiterate to them, as I have with the Lynnwood mobile home park, the rural Ottawa farmers and the Rideau Carleton Raceway, that I will continue to defend them. Because, again, they are everything that’s good in society, and sometimes they are forgotten here at Queen’s Park by this Ontario Liberal government.

Finally, I want to talk about a group called the rural Ottawa seniors’ services centre. ROSSS is now experiencing a $100,000 debt this year. They’re experiencing that because in rural Ottawa they don’t get the same grants that they would in urban or downtown Ottawa to look after the seniors; and they have experienced rapid growth—I believe over 40% growth. I’ll tell you why, Speaker.

There are places in rural Ottawa that are growing and expanding, and the population is exploding: Manotick has a new housing development, Greely has a new housing development, Stittsville and Richmond have new housing developments, as do some of the fastest-growing communities like Findlay Creek and Riverside South.

As a result of that, the seniors’ population has expanded. Yet there has been no recognition by the Liberals to look at this rural Ottawa service centre for seniors to give them any assistance. When you’re looking at servicing seniors and providing them with the support that they need in a growing population and then in an expanding seniors’ population, because our community is getting older, it is very difficult.

I asked the previous minister of seniors, and I’ve asked this current minister of seniors to do something about this. They will be in a position, by the end of this month—which, by the way, is Friday—where they will have to take from their reserves. That is not sustainable, in order to service our growing and expanding seniors’ population.

The people at ROSSS are doing good work. They’re doing good work for seniors who want to stay in their homes. It was this government that decided they wanted to bring in an Aging at Home Strategy which, at the end of the day, hurts the Osgoode Care Centre. So if you’re not going to fund the Osgoode Care Centre to expand and you’re not going to fund them to upgrade their beds, then you’d better well support ROSSS so that you can keep those seniors in their homes. And that’s not what’s happening.

When I look at this supply motion, when I look at what’s going to happen in the next budget, I don’t see a recognition that there is anything there for rural Ontario. I don’t see that there is anything there for rural seniors. I don’t see that there is anything there for the people who are providing us with our food. I don’t see anything there for those who are suffering from poor water quality.

So, Speaker, I will be forced to oppose, obviously, the government’s supply motion. I will be forced to do that because if I look at the people of Carleton, the people of Carleton do not have the support of this Liberal government. Therefore I cannot support this Liberal government’s supply motion.

I haven’t even gotten to talk about Nepean, but I will have an opportunity to talk about Nepean when I talk about the budget. I’ll have an opportunity over the next 16 months to talk about Nepean and, hopefully, beyond that in this Legislature. The people of Nepean have been gracious. I obviously represent them; I’m a hockey mom there, Speaker. I was awarded this past Saturday by my daughter’s hockey team, as the trainer, the distinction of “everybody’s mom.” That was one of the proudest things I could ever have. I’ve won four elections. I’ve won Ottawa’s favourite politician from Faces Magazine.

I’ve been awarded many things in my career, Speaker, but the best was this certificate that I received from those little girls that I train in hockey. It was quite remarkable.

We did a wonderful day of humanity, inclusion and acceptance in Nepean. It happens to be the fastest-growing constituency in all of eastern Ontario. One of the top three, I believe, in all of Ontario. It’s a very diverse, exciting place, one where I’ve been able to open probably more schools than every other Ottawa MPP combined. I do have that wonderful distinction as well, and we’re going to continue to do that. But we still have issues, and some of them are mental health issues.

Before I conclude, I want to raise one more thing, and that is the challenges that we are facing with opiate addiction and overdoses in the city of Ottawa. That’s happening in Kanata, but it’s also happening in Barrhaven, in Nepean, in Gloucester and in other places that I represent. In Nepean, we are working on having an addiction facility and a place that children can go to if they have mental health issues. It will be run through the Nepean, Rideau and Osgoode Community Resource Centre, and hopefully housed within the new Salvation Army that is being built in Nepean.

I’m working with this dynamic group because what we want to do in the month of May—as you know, I’ve disclosed publicly that I have dealt with depression and anxiety. On my one-year anniversary of that disclosure, I’m bringing in the Royal Ottawa Mental Health Centre, the Queensway-Carleton Hospital, the Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario and the Youth Services Bureau to do panels on how kids can talk to their parents about mental health and addictions, and how parents can talk to their kids about the same.

We’re going to have workshops, but we’re also going to have a wonderful marketplace bringing all of the various organizations together, in order for parents to have that sense that we do have the services that are required. But there’s going to be a lot of fundraising in this, and I don’t see that recognized in the supply motion, nor will I see it likely in the budget. I’m going to continue to do that.

But we’re going to have an entire youth mental health month. We’re going to start it with this wonderful summit that we’re having on April 30, and we’re going to end it at the end of May with a road hockey tournament called Top Shelf. Hopefully we’ll raise lots of money at this, in order to start funding this facility that we want, but we’re going to need some support from the provincial government.

We are short on mental health beds in the city of Ottawa. We’re short on detox beds in the city of Ottawa. We’ve been advocating as parents and as constituents—I often look at myself as a parent in many of these situations—for more funding for that. That’s required. I don’t see it in this budget, and I haven’t seen it in previous budgets. My constituents who are dealing with mental health and addictions have been let down, so I will continue to advocate for those folks.

I just want to sign off on this love letter to the people of Carleton just by saying that I’ll continue to support them, obviously. And to the people of Nepean, obviously, I will continue to support them as well.

As a result of what I’ve just mentioned, Speaker, on behalf of the Progressive Conservative caucus and our leader Patrick Brown, we will not be supporting the supply motion.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Further debate?

Mr. John Vanthof: It’s always an honour to be able to stand in this House, today to speak on behalf of my leader Andrea Horwath and my caucus colleagues on Bill 111, the Supply Act. As the minister responsible for the Treasury Board said, this isn’t about new funding; the Supply Act is about allowing the government to pay the bills, basically, on their budget. That’s what this is about.

As the minister said, there’s an estimates process. Nine ministries were brought forward through the estimates process, and I had the opportunity to be in one of those grillings of the ministry. It was agriculture, because I’m the agriculture critic.

I’d like to expand, just to explain how the estimates process works for someone who might be interested. The opposition parties have the opportunity to ask the ministry questions and the minister and the ministry, at the minister’s discretion, have the opportunity to elaborate on their programs.

For example, in the agriculture estimates process, the minister went to great pains to talk about how agriculture is so modern and how it depends on technology, to which we all agreed. As an example, he even went as far as saying that there is now a telephone app to help give a farmer advice on how to deliver a calf, which we thought was kind of interesting.

Interjection: Wow. You’d need a third hand.

Mr. John Vanthof: Yes, hopefully farmers don’t need help with that, but for those who do, I took the opportunity to point out that much of rural Ontario, specifically northern Ontario, has very little access or no access to Internet, to broadband and little access to cellphones. So what good does an app do to help deliver a calf if you have no access? To which he didn’t have an answer. That’s the issue. It’s issues like that. This is just an example of how estimates work.

He went on to say that northern Ontario—I am from northern Ontario, so I’m going to focus on it just for a minute—is seen as the prospect for huge agriculture development, which it is. There is a lot of opportunity in northern Ontario, a lot of opportunity—

Interjection.

Mr. John Vanthof: —especially since we got the app to help deliver calves. Thank you for that, member from Manitoulin.

He went a considerable distance, and one of the reasons is—give a plug for northern Ontario—that the land in northern Ontario per acre is much, much cheaper per unit than land in many other parts of the province. But I had to point out that that has always been the case. Now land in Oxford county could be $20,000 an acre and it could be more, and land in northern Ontario, where I come from, could be $2,000 an acre—good land. But 20 years ago, the ratio was the same. That’s not really the issue.

The minister talked about young people moving to northern Ontario. I wanted to make the point that young people are going to want services. They’re going to want Internet. Many parts of northern Ontario are going to want public transportation, Speaker, which has been drastically cut by this government. In parts of northern Ontario where the minister and the Premier want to develop agriculture, there is two-day- or three-day-a-week bus service. You’re not going to attract people with a lack of public services. This government is failing to address that.

It didn’t address that in the last budget. The last budget was called, I believe, Building Ontario Up for Everyone. Those are the estimates we’re talking about right here. The budget before that was Building Ontario Up. I can’t remember what the title was for the budget before that. But they’re failing on that front.

I’m going to return to the Internet for one more issue. There are people who say, “Yes, well, Internet service isn’t provided publicly in other places, so why should it be in northern Ontario?” Well, the government did provide Internet service in northern Ontario, through a company called Ontera. Ontera was part of the Ontario Northland Transportation Commission, and it was fulfilling its mandate of providing necessary service where private companies couldn’t because, quite frankly, it didn’t make business sense.

It makes business sense for the overall economy, but not for the individual company, like providing Internet in a place where you want industry—specifically agriculture—to grow. We had that. We had that ability. It was called Ontera. And what did this government do with Ontera?

Mr. Michael Mantha: They sold it.

Mr. John Vanthof: They sold it—they actually gave it away. They gave it away. And we were promised, “The new company, Bell Aliant, is a great company. You won’t see a change in service.” Now places that were formally serviced by ONTC Ontera are still serviced by Ontario, but it’s Bell Aliant Ontera, and you can’t set up a new account. They don’t provide new accounts, Speaker.

Interjection: What?

Mr. John Vanthof: They don’t. My daughter bought a house in a place that was served by Ontera. It says on their website, “Call us if you want service.” She called, and, “I’m sorry, but no, we don’t provide new accounts.”

The government is talking about building Ontario up, but at the same time they’re doing that, they are continually selling public services to private entities that aren’t providing the service.

Ontario is a big place, and the way this province needs to work and the way it should work is that all parts of the province work together so that we are all successful together. Huge swaths of this province aren’t feeling that from this government. I would say that huge swaths even of the urban parts of this province aren’t feeling that from this government.

Again, to build back on to what the minister was saying about Building Ontario Up for Everyone—and one of the first things she focused on was education. That’s one of their pride and joys. Well, is it 600 rural schools that are in the process of being closed? I’m not sure—

Hon. Deborah Matthews: No, I don’t think you have that number right.

Mr. John Vanthof: I might not have the number right. But again, from an agricultural perspective, if you’re going to get a family to move, if you want a family to move to a part of Ontario to farm or support a farm—they’re going to look for a school. We have to come to the realization that it’s not just providing the education—and it might not be through the Education Act—but the school has to be a central part of the equation. If you’re going to make rural Ontario strong, if you’re going to make urban Ontario strong, we need local schools.

The second was health care. As critic for the Treasury Board and for finance, I had the opportunity to tour part of the province with the SCOFEA committee—I’ve got to remember what those letters stand for; I call it the finance committee. The minister talked about the public consultation for the budget. I would like to read one of those deputations. It was in London. The deputation was made by Mrs. Alma Martin and Mr. Bryan Smith. The first speaker was Mr. Smith. Mrs. Martin had a hard time telling this story herself.

I asked her specifically after she made this deputation if I could read it in the House if I had the opportunity, and I would like to take this opportunity now because I think it—she took the time to come to the deputation for a reason. Public input is very important, and I think this one deserves—they all deserve to be read in the House, but this one specifically. As I said, Bryan Smith was the first speaker:

“Alma is here today with me and has asked that her story and the story of Bill, her late husband, be told. Until a few months ago, I only knew them slightly as members of our community working to stop a dump that was affecting our environmental and human health.

“At an event in the fall, Bill, an active Kiwanian, was seated at a table collecting signatures from the public for an environmental question because, he told me, he was awaiting knee surgery and couldn’t lift or carry. He had been waiting for two years.

“When surgery was finally to happen, Bill and Alma travelled to London’s University Hospital, because Woodstock doesn’t have the cardiology backup needed. Knee surgery these days is routine. Bill’s was anything but routine.

“Bill needed anti-coagulants as regular medication, but was instructed to stop taking them three days according to a surgeon, but five days according to an anaesthetist. That made for a risk of blood clots. The risk, Bill and Alma were told, was acceptable. Nothing that happened thereafter was acceptable.

“Bill was in a room with a dementia patient, where recovery was difficult because of the other man’s sufferings. When he was discharged by a fourth-year medical student, he was sick. Alma, though, was hopeful that being home would help him. She could spend more time with him, rather than driving back and forth.

“He got worse at home and was taken by ambulance to Ingersoll’s Alexandra Hospital. It appeared that he had pneumonia. His kidney was malfunctioning. Creatinine levels were too high. He didn’t get better.

“The infection from University Hospital was resistant to antibiotics. He was sent again to London. There, he found himself again in a ward where rest was difficult. Alma begged—that’s her expression—that Bill be moved to a private room sitting empty in the same hall. She was told that the hospital was not allowed to use that room unless he required isolation for a drug-resistant infection. He had one, contracted in the hospital, but it was undiagnosed.

“After intervention, he was moved from the ward to a semi-private room but, again, less than acceptable. He was placed in with another dementia patient who was out of his clothes, who was yelling at the top of his lungs, who struck the nurse and whom it took three security people to secure. The bed beside Bill was then occupied by a man with a staph infection so serious that doctors and nurses wore gowns, masks and gloves. Bill did not have any protection from these germs other than curtains between the beds.

“He didn’t get better. He did get shuttled back to Ingersoll in a transport without medical support, whose staff said that if anything went wrong en route, they would call an ambulance. The infection was not only in his lungs, it was now on his skin. He didn’t get better.

“There is more to this troubling story, and I’ll leave it to you to imagine or to ask Alma. Alma is still in grief. I attended Bill’s funeral on December 4. Alma had told me that she didn’t think she would get through the telling of this story that I’ve shared with her permission, but that, if you have any questions, she will try to answer.”

One of the committee members asked Alma, and the specific question, if I can—okay, Mr. Yvan Baker asked the question: “I wanted to ask you, since you’re here with us today, based on what you’ve been through and your experience, what advice would you give this committee as far as what we can do to improve our health care system?”

Mrs. Alma Martin said: “It would have been great if Bill could have had his surgery two years earlier. He waited a long time for that. He was hopeful, because he was going to be curling and golfing and doing all the things he loved to do again.

“I don’t understand why we pay a CEO $650,000 when that would pay 100 nurses’ salaries—why one man deserves that kind of income, when they’re so short of staff on the floors.

“My husband was treated two thirds by university- and college-level students, which was a wonderful experience for them, but I don’t understand why we don’t have more fully qualified RNs on the floor, more doctors on the floor.

“I spent long days at the hospital with Bill, because he needed things and there just weren’t enough hands to provide what he needed. Even the announcement now that family members can be at their loved ones’ side 24/7 is just an excuse to downgrade our health system further, because it’s the families who will pick up the tab for getting what everyone needs. That’s what I did. When it came to basics, like water and cleanliness and helping him to wash, it was me who was doing those things, not trained nursing staff.

“We just need more qualified and trained nurses and doctors to offer the care that our family members need.”

That was one of the most moving things that I’ve had the honour—it wasn’t honour; I don’t know what the word is to describe that—the privilege to witness. She lived through a lot. Unfortunately, Bill didn’t. I’m not saying our health care system is always like this—I’m very proud of the health care system we have in Ontario—but there are a lot of things we can do much, much, much better.

The Supply Act is more than just lines and numbers, you know? It’s much more than what this government is taking credit for what they’re doing. The Supply Act, like everything we do in this House, is about people, people like Bill and Alma, people who questioned whether everything is running as well as it should be in this province.

Another issue that we hear a lot about, that the member from Nepean–Carleton focused on a fair bit, and that affects all Ontarians is, yes, the cost of hydro. The government will respond that, “Well, we’ve come up with the fair hydro plan.” So you have to question what the plan was before, because now it’s a fair hydro plan, but we’ve had several—actually, if you want to talk about hydro planning, they had a long-term energy plan in 2010. It was updated in 2013, and then we’re going to have a new one soon again. But you have to question the planning, Speaker. You really have to question it. You have to question the whole hydro policy.

At the eleventh hour of this government’s current mandate, they have to come up with a bailout package for the residents of Ontario. Actually, it’s not a bailout package, because the residents are paying for their own bailout package. But why, if the government has all these long-term energy plans, does it have to be followed at the end with a bailout package? I think that’s the biggest question that has to be answered here, as far as hydro. You shouldn’t need the bailout package if you had a decent plan.

Part of the problem with the plan and with all their plans is you have to question whether they actually thought about the people at the end of the line, the people who actually pay the bills, because obviously they didn’t or they wouldn’t have had to come out with this bailout package. That is a huge problem.

I’m new to this Supply Act finance stuff, so I looked through Hansard for last year’s Supply Act debate. I saw another planning thing that the government, I guess, introduced last year, and it was introduced by the member from—I want to say his name—Etobicoke Centre, right there. I’m hoping for a report on this. It’s called the Centre of Excellence for Evidence-based Decision Making Support.

They should have kicked that in a decade ago because the decision-making and the support didn’t take into account that, at the end of the day, people have to pay their hydro bills, and companies have to pay their hydro bills, because they’re the ones that create the jobs. Farmers have to pay their hydro bills.

But for some reason, the planning apparatus at the Ministry of Energy and the IESO, OPA and OEB must have missed that. They must have missed that, or worse. I am somewhat loath to say this: or worse—the Ministry of Energy and the Liberal government just didn’t care until we came to the eleventh hour.

Why did it have to come to the point that people are losing their businesses because they can’t pay their hydro? People have lost their businesses. The new fair hydro plan doesn’t help if you lost your business six months ago because you couldn’t pay the hydro bill.

This government has been in power for 15 years, and they came up with a plan a week ago. They’ve been in power for 15 years, and at the eleventh hour, “Oh, my gosh, look where we are in the polls. We need a plan.”

Mr. Taras Natyshak: Donald Trump is more popular than that.

Mr. John Vanthof: Come on. You know what? Other governments have a hand in what’s happening in hydro, but you’ve been there for 15 years. I can remember when we were bringing up the issue of hydro rates, a previous Minister of Energy said something like, “What are you complaining about? It’s only the cost of a cup of coffee.” Only the cost of a cup of coffee—do you remember that?

Mr. Steve Clark: I remember it.

Mr. John Vanthof: I remember it.

I remember when the Kidd Creek smelter in Timmins closed. Why? Because of energy. That should have been a huge warning sign for the government. That was before Donald Trump ruined “huge.”

That should have been an enormous, enormous red flag. It seemed that they weren’t paying attention. They weren’t paying attention.

We’ve brought it up in the House. I’ll go back to my riding. Earlton Grocery started in 2009: a $3,500 a month hydro bill. I don’t have the number. I think it’s not quite $3,500; I think it was $3,200. It’s now over $7,000 a month.

Their energy experts must have seen this coming and no one said to themselves, “You know what? Little places, are they going to be able to afford this? Are big places going to be able to afford this? What are we doing long-term to fix this problem?” No, they didn’t. They didn’t, not until they saw themselves sinking in the polls.

You wonder if the Centre of Excellence for Evidence-based Decision Making Support is more aptly a polling company. You’ve got to wonder, because hydro is something that is managed by the province. You can’t blame it on—it’s the province. They’ve been there for close to 15 years. That’s a big issue, Speaker. It’s a big issue.

I think we’ve talked about hydro, and we’re going to continue to talk about hydro. They’re going to continue to push their fair hydro plan, which actually isn’t really a plan. You’re kicking the can down the road, and hopefully, you can kick it down the road past the next election. That, unfortunately, is the sum total of the fair hydro plan.

Do people need relief? Definitely. Who is going to argue against relief?

Mr. Ted McMeekin: Wave a magic wand.

Mr. John Vanthof: Well, one of the ministers is heckling me quite effectively. If anyone is trying to use the magic wand, it’s the current Liberal government. It is the current Liberal government. They are trying to make a problem go away by just punting it. People are under so much stress from hydro that they’re hoping that they will see this—

Interjection: Hail Mary pass?

Mr. John Vanthof: Yes, basically. What they’re basically doing is they are saying, “Here, folks, we’re just going to let you make the minimum payment on your hydro credit card. Don’t worry what’s going to happen down the road.” That’s what’s happening here. This is the Liberal credit card minimum payment hydro plan. That’s what this is. They’re hoping that people forget that the payment is going to come. It’s going to come down the road.

The way this is—actually, I can’t really say I know how this is structured because we really haven’t seen legislation. In my five years here, I have noticed that sometimes the ads and the press releases don’t really match the legislation—does that mean I have to wrap it up pretty soon, Speaker?

In my last minute, I’m going to talk about a different energy source than hydro. I’m going to talk about natural gas in rural Ontario. Do you realize, Speaker—and I’m sure you do, because you’re from rural Ontario—that the natural gas program has been announced one, two, four times with no movement? That’s the difference; right? They can announce it. They can put it in the budget, but that doesn’t mean it’s going to happen. That’s the same issue that we might be facing with this hydro plan.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Thank you.

Second reading debate deemed adjourned.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): It is now 10:15 and this House stands recessed until 10:30.

The House recessed from 1014 to 1030.

Introduction of Visitors

Ms. Lisa MacLeod: On behalf of the Progressive Conservative caucus, I want to say hello to our friend Frank, who used to work here for many, many years. Hi, Frank Ioni. It’s good to see you and the people that are here with you.

Mr. Percy Hatfield: I’d like to introduce two friends from Mortgage Professionals Canada: Lionel Lewko, who’s the vice-president, and Paul Taylor, who’s the CEO. Welcome, both, to the Ontario Legislature.

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: I would like to introduce some guests this morning who are recipients of the leading women, building communities award in the riding of Don Valley West: Lesley Skelly and her husband, David Skelly; Marjorie Hiley and her fiancé, Robert Giard; Aishah Sheri and her daughter, Tasneem Sheri; Lisa Green and her son, Zachary Green; and my constituency assistant, Afie Mardukhi, who makes things happen in Don Valley West. Welcome, all of you.

Mr. Steve Clark: Speaker, I want to introduce to you and, through you, to members of the Legislative Assembly a constituent from my riding in Leeds–Grenville who is here. I’d like to introduce Corinna Smith-Gatcke, who is a mortgage professional. She’s a native of Lansdowne, Ontario. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mr. Granville Anderson: I am pleased to welcome the parents of Keira Hodgins here today: dad, Allan, and mom, Charisma, who are with us, along with her brother, Andrew, and grandmother, Jeannie.

I would also like to welcome Brian McHugh from my riding of Durham, who is here with the Canadian Franchise Association. Welcome.

Mr. Ernie Hardeman: I’d like to introduce Shane Curtis and Andrew Burns, who are here from Tillsonburg today. They are both hard-working members from the chamber of commerce in Tillsonburg.

Mr. Bob Delaney: On behalf of the member for Eglinton–Lawrence, I’m pleased to introduce guests of page Aidan Ang: his mother, Marianne Hu; his father, Alex Ang; and his sister, Alexandra Ang. They’re in the public gallery this morning. Please welcome them.

Mr. Monte McNaughton: I’m proud to welcome Jim Vickery from Thunder Bay, who is at Queen’s Park today. I actually met him on a flight from Thunder Bay this morning. He’s in his 51st year working for Hydro One. Welcome to Queen’s Park, Jim.

Mr. Yvan Baker: I’d like to welcome the Canadian Franchise Association. They’re here at Queen’s Park for Franchise Awareness Day. We’re joined by a number of their members: Bill Dietz, regional vice-president, from Paul Davis Systems; Matthew Badrov, who’s a lawyer with Sherrard Kuzz; Julie May Rogers, manager of government relations with McDonald’s Restaurants of Canada; Hermann Delisle, director of franchising at That Franchise Group; J. Perry Maisonneuve, senior vice-president, AllStar Group of Companies; and Tony D’Aurizio, director of human resources at Cara Operations. I invite everyone to join us at the reception this evening from 5 to 7 in the legislative dining room.

Mrs. Gila Martow: I’m pleased to welcome, again, Rabbi Yirmi Cohen from Thornhill with his son, Mendy Cohen. They always come at this time of year to bring me a shmurah matzah in a box, which is a very authentic form of the matzah that I use for my Seder. Thank you, Yirmi and Mendy.

Mr. Jim McDonell: I’d like to welcome Nadeen Borg, Bill Dietz, Julie May Rogers and Hermann Delisle this morning. We had a great meeting about the franchisees and I look forward to seeing them—

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you. Further introductions? The member from Etobicoke Centre.

Mr. Yvan Baker: Thank you, Speaker. I’m doubling up today. I’d like to welcome, as well, Mortgage Professionals Canada. We have 15 delegates here today, including Paul Taylor, president and CEO, and Mark Kerzner, chair of the board. I’d like to welcome all members to a reception that they’re holding in committee room 228 from 5:30 to 7:30 later this evening.

Ms. Sylvia Jones: Please join me in welcoming page captain Matthew and his parents, Linda and Sengkee Ahn. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mr. James J. Bradley: I’d like to introduce someone who is involved with the youth speeches outside. It’s Laura Gannon of St. Catharines, who is chairing this event. I’d like to welcome her to the Legislative Assembly precinct today.

Mr. Todd Smith: I’d like to welcome my good friend from Mortgage Professionals Canada, Glenn May-Anderson, to the Legislature this morning.

Mr. Bill Walker: I’d like to welcome Kyleigh Benninger from Chesley. She’s here with Seneca College, public relations and corporate communications. They were all doing speeches on the lawn of the Legislature this morning as part of their class outreach.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Welcome.

I have two. With us in the public gallery are guests from the Manitoba Legislative Internship Program. Please join me in welcoming them for a few days of learning about the Ontario Legislature. Welcome.

In a bit of a surprise visit, I have with me in the Speaker’s gallery—and I know I’m going to pay for this—my oldest brother, Pat; the next two, the twins, Rob and Norm; and my brother, Rick, are here. Welcome.

There are others, but there is no other brother Joe, just to let you know.

We have done all our introductions. It is therefore now time for question period.

Oral Questions

Privatization of public assets

Mr. Patrick Brown: My question is for the Premier. In 2014, taxpayer-funded research and polling leaked to the media had this to say: “Most Ontarians would not support the provincial government selling a controlling interest in any of the five crown corporations tested.” Three years later, most people don’t support the Liberals’ short-sighted Hydro One fire sale.

Mr. Speaker, it is not too late to do the right thing. Will the Liberals finally commit to stopping the fire sale of Hydro One?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: I would just say to the member opposite that we made a very conscious decision not to do what that party had done with the 407, because there was no benefit to the people of Ontario with that fire sale.

In fact, the decision that we made about building transit and transportation infrastructure in this province was premised on the understanding that Ontario’s economic well-being is at least in part dependent on having the right infrastructure for people to be able to move around, for goods to be able to move, and there had been decades of neglect in terms of building infrastructure in this province.

We’re catching up. We’re doing it in a responsible way. We’re seeing the fruits of those investments as Ontario leads economic growth in this country.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Be seated, please.

Supplementary?

Mr. Patrick Brown: Back to the Premier: The government asked the people of Ontario, “Do you support selling Hydro One?” The answer was a resounding no. So the question that the Premier needs to answer is why spend hundreds of thousands and possibly millions of dollars on Liberal research firms if you’re just going to ignore that advice? Do hundreds of thousands of dollars, do millions of dollars of taxpayers’ precious funds, mean nothing to this government? Why spend that money? Why help your friends in Liberal research firms if you’re just going to ignore them? It’s not right.

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: There are many, many issues that government has to make decisions on. It was fundamental to our understanding of the economic needs of this province that we invest in infrastructure. By infrastructure, it means transit. It means roads. It means bridges. It means hospitals. It means schools. It means infrastructure across this province. Some $160 billion over 12 years are being invested in this province.

As I said, the fruits of those investments are being seen. We have in Ontario created 702,000 net new jobs since the recession. That job creation is connected to the investments that we have made and the economic growth that we have seen.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Final supplementary?

Mr. Patrick Brown: Again to the Premier: I asked a serious question about Liberal research being ignored, Liberals patting the backs of their friends—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Okay, both sides: That’s enough.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member from Leeds–Grenville is not helpful.

And also, I will make mention of the fact that while someone is putting the question, I am hearing heckling on the same side, and when someone is putting the answer I’m hearing the heckling on the same side.

Please finish.

Mr. Patrick Brown: To the Premier: The fact that this Liberal polling is being leaked to the media in itself is interesting. That means at least one Liberal wants to do the right thing. At least one Liberal recognizes that the fire sale of Hydro One is short-sighted.

What I’d like to know, and hopefully the Premier can tell us, is which Liberal leadership candidate is the one who leaked this to the media? The official opposition would like to thank that Liberal for doing the right thing. To the Premier: Who leaked this to the media?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: There are huge challenges facing governments in 2017. There are issues that have importance for the future economic well-being of this province. If the Leader of the Opposition is saying to me, “Premier, why don’t you just govern according to the polls?”, I think that gives us an insight into the political methodology that he ascribes to.

What we do on this side of the House is measure and weigh all of the alternatives. We take input, of course, from polling, but we take input from business, we take input from economists, we take input from people, and then we make a decision that is going to be in the best interests of this province. That’s what we’ve done. That’s why we’ve made investments, and the economy—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Stop the clock, please. Be seated, please.

Before I move to the new question: The member from Leeds–Grenville, I indicated to you that I acknowledged you just to make sure that you heard it. You were working on the second one when I stood up, but you didn’t get it.

And that goes for anybody else. If you want to elevate this, I will lower it.

New question?

Government advertising

Mr. Patrick Brown: My question is for the Premier. We know this Liberal government has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars, nearly a million dollars, advertising their hydro Hail Mary that is very partisan. How much have they spent advertising the damaging effects of the fentanyl crisis in Ontario?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: The member opposite has raised a couple of issues in terms of the opioid crisis that we are seeing in Ontario and, quite frankly, across the country. We take it extremely seriously. We understand that there is much that needs to be done.

We have, in fact, put in place an opioid strategy. As I said a number of weeks ago, we know we need to work with municipalities to make sure that municipalities have the tools that they need and that those supports are in place. We will continue to work to enhance the strategy that we already have in place, working with other jurisdictions and learning from the work that they have done.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Patrick Brown: Back to the Premier: I have to confess, I already knew the answer. The answer is that the government is spending nearly a million dollars on partisan hydro ads and almost nothing when it comes to the crisis we’re facing. They have spent barely anything to warn Ontarians about the dangers of fentanyl.

Why are these vanity ads, these partisan Liberal hydro ads, more important than letting the people of Ontario know about the dangers of the fentanyl crisis?

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Be seated, please. Thank you.

Premier?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: I know the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care wants to speak to the investments we are making, but I really need to comment on the juxtaposition of these two issues. I understand that the Leader of the Opposition feels that this kind of political rhetoric is helpful in terms of—I don’t know what—maybe his political future. But the fentanyl crisis and the opioid crisis in this country is extremely serious. All of us should rise above the pettiness of this kind of juxtaposition of issues to focus on what is really important.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Be seated, please.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): We’re now moving to warnings. Clear?

Final supplementary?

Mr. Patrick Brown: Again to the Premier: A 14-year-old just died because of this crisis. The Ontario Association of Chiefs of Police, the OPP and Ottawa Public Health have all launched some form of awareness campaign, but crickets from this government.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Stop the clock. The Minister of Municipal Affairs is warned.

Mr. Patrick Brown: A lethal dose of pure fentanyl is as little as two milligrams, the weight of 32 grains of table salt or even seven poppy seeds. Preventable deaths are happening across this province, tragically.

There is a limited advertising budget that the government has. Right now it’s being spent, according to the Auditor General, on self-congratulatory ads, partisan Liberal hydro ads.

My question is very direct and clear to the Premier: Will you stop the hydro ads and put every cent into this fentanyl crisis? It’s the right thing—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Stop the clock. Be seated, please. Thank you.

Premier?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Minister of Health and Long-Term Care.

Hon. Eric Hoskins: The opioid crisis in this country is something that I think all of us here in the Legislature appreciate the seriousness of and that we need to take those important steps to save lives and provide the supports that particularly our community partners need to be able to address this crisis right across the country. That’s why it’s so important that in this province, last October, we addressed this in a multi-faceted way.

In fact, I had a meeting just a few days ago with the Chief Medical Officer of Health. Beginning April 1 of this year, on a weekly basis, all of our hospitals, public health units and the Ministry of Health will have real-time data in terms of the scope of this problem—of the deaths and the overdoses that take place. We’re expanding the pain clinics in this province to 17. We’ve made naloxone available free of charge through pharmacies and through public health units—

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you. Some individuals are tiptoeing very close.

New question?

Hydro rates

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My question is for the Premier. Since the Liberals got elected, hydro rates have gone up over 300%. Since this Premier took office, they have gone up by 50% alone. It’s a startling fact, but more startling is what this actually means to Ontario families. It means more people than ever are being forced to choose whether to pay their hydro bills or to put food on the table.

When will the Premier do more than buy radio ads and issue press releases as a response to this crisis that her government has created?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: We recognize that electricity prices, that hydro prices have been a burden for people in all corners of the province, which is exactly why, on top of the 8% that we already have cut people’s bills by, another 17%, so a total of 25%—people will see that reduction on their summer bills.

We started in 2013 recognizing that we needed to take costs out of the system. We have taken a number of actions, but we realized, even with the accumulation of actions that we had taken in 2013, 2014 and 2015, that more needed to be done. That’s why our plan will take 25% off the bills of everyone who in their home pays their electricity bills. On top of that, people who live in more remote and rural areas will see another reduction that could take them up to a 40% or 50% reduction.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Does the Premier realize that time-of-use billing is a big problem for many Ontarians? For a parent who’s raising kids, it means you can’t cook dinner at dinnertime. It means you have to stay up really late at night to do the laundry. That’s just not right, Speaker.

Can the Premier tell us, since she refuses to release the details of her band-aid hydro fix, will it include ending punitive time-of-use pricing?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Minister of Energy.

Hon. Glenn Thibeault: I’m very pleased to rise and talk about Ontario’s Fair Hydro Plan. Today, I have in front of me the technical briefing that was provided to all of the critics of all of our opposition parties and the media. It talks specifically about many of the actions that we’re taking, as a government, to reduce the bills of all families, small businesses and farms across the province—up to 25% for all families. They’re going to see that reduction come summer.

Also, Mr. Speaker, when it comes to time-of-use, we’re also having pilot projects that are being looked at right now by our system operator, by the OEB, that are talking about ways of ensuring that we can continue to find ways to help families and businesses.

Our plan is a substantial plan that is bringing relief to families—unlike the opposition party that has a bumper sticker plan that does absolutely nothing to help families and low-income individuals right away.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Final supplementary.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: People need information from this government, not a slide deck that’s provided to media and opposition critics. Shame on you.

Ontarians need to know what this plan will actually do. Ontarians need to know that, Speaker, so they have some certainty around the future. The Premier needs to publicly release the details of her plan in this Legislature so that it’s available for open and transparent debate instead of playing a game of political smoke and mirrors and spending public money on partisan ads.

Enough with the PR. When will Ontarians see the Premier’s actual plan?

Hon. Glenn Thibeault: I think it has been well said, the details of our plan: a 25% reduction for all families in the province of Ontario. And for those families who are in northern Ontario and rural parts of our province, they’re going to see more than just 25%. We’ve actually reduced the distribution rate for Hydro One customers and seven other LDCs. They will see reductions between 40% and 50%, and that’s thanks to the action of this government.

We’ve made sure, as well, that we are looking after low-income individuals, our most vulnerable and our First Nations, something they didn’t even include in their plan. We’ve made sure that we’ve enhanced the Ontario Electricity Support Program. And for our First Nations on-reserve, they will see their delivery line reduced, as well, and eliminated.

Privatization of public assets

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Unfortunately, the people won’t see a plan from the Liberals any time soon by the looks of things.

My next question is for the Premier. The privatization of our hydro system began under the Progressive Conservatives, and clearly the torch has been successfully passed to this Liberal government. But overwhelmingly, the people of this province—an overwhelming majority of Ontarians—have made it clear that they want a public hydro system. When will the Premier finally listen and stop the sell-off of Hydro One?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Again, I completely understand why the leader of the third party would want to talk about this, because she actually has a plan that would increase or do nothing to reduce people’s electricity bills. Her proposal would either keep electricity bills at the same cost or increase them. The issue that she raises today, the broadening of the ownership of Hydro One, would not take one cent off one person’s electricity bill in this province.

We made a very difficult decision around the broadening of the ownership of Hydro One in order to build the infrastructure that this province needs in every corner of the province—infrastructure that will allow people to move themselves, their families, their goods more quickly and will allow this economy to thrive. That’s the decision we made, and we’re seeing the fruits of that.

Having said that, we know electricity bills have to come down. We’ve got the plan that’s going to do that.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Speaker, for such a studious Premier, it’s quite shocking and surprising that she has not obviously read the NDP plan. That’s apparent through her response. But I can tell you this: A quick shot in the arm for a political—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Stop the clock.

Please finish.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: I can tell you this: A quick shot in the arm for a political party and a leader who is struggling with low popularity should not be the driving force behind the creation of public policy in the province of Ontario.

The Premier and her party congratulate themselves regularly on their evidence-based approach to policy-making. Can the Premier tell us where the evidence is that continuing the wrong-headed sell-off of Hydro One will be good for families or businesses?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Our fair hydro plan is based on reducing people’s electricity costs; that’s what it’s about.

As I said earlier, we began in 2013 to take costs out of the system, to renegotiate contracts, because we knew that there was a need to reduce those costs so that electricity bills would not go up as quickly and as high. Having said that, we recognize that there needed to be more done, and that’s why we made the decisions that we’ve made.

In fact, I have read the NDP proposal. I know that what the NDP proposal will do is make people wait for any change, will not reduce people’s electricity bills, and in some cases will actually increase their bills. That’s not a proposal that we would adopt. We’re going to see electricity prices come down in this province come the summer all across the province.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Final supplementary?

Ms. Andrea Horwath: The reality is nobody trusts this Liberal government and you can see why. You just have to go to the Internet, read our plan, and know that you can’t trust what comes out of this Liberal Premier’s mouth.

The NDP plan to lower hydro costs by up to 30% is being debated in this House this afternoon. Unlike this Premier and her party, we’re not afraid to give Ontarians detailed plans or take bold action, like doing what people want and bringing Hydro One back into full public ownership.

Will the Premier stop her wrong-headed sell-off of Hydro One, agree to start fixing the systemic problems in the system, which started with them, and continues with them, and actually support our plan, which is the only plan that addresses the systemic problems, gives people relief on their bills and is, in fact, the only plan on the table?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Let me just say back to the leader of the third party, I think it would be very helpful if she would explain to the people of Ontario how one cent would come off one electricity bill if we made the changes she’s suggesting about Hydro One. I’d like the leader of the third—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The leader of the third party is warned.

Premier?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Let me ask the leader of the third party why, in her proposal, there is no mention of First Nations,

whereas in our plan we’re actually removing delivery charges from First Nations communities.

Furthermore, I’d like to ask the leader of the third party why she would make low-income users of electricity in the province wait; why she doesn’t have a plan that would be immediate for low-income users.

The reality is that we did a lot of work to come up with proposals that actually would lower people’s electricity prices. That is not what the NDP has done. I understand why. They want to talk about Hydro One and they want to talk about their proposal, but the fact is that what they’re proposing will not reduce people’s electricity bills. Ours will, Mr. Speaker. We’re going to go with our plan.

GO Transit

Mr. Michael Harris: My question is to the Minister of Transportation. Yesterday, we learned of the approval of a $100-million GO Transit station in the minister’s riding of Vaughan. This is despite government’s own expert analysis indicating that the station would mean longer travel times, force current GO passengers back onto the road and result in a $143-million loss.

Mr. Speaker, was the station approved because the minister put his interest to see a “Premier Del Duca” nameplate ahead of the interests of Ontario and GO riders in the province?

Hon. Steven Del Duca: I thank the member for the question. I’m always delighted to have the opportunity to stand in my place in this House and talk about the incredible plan that our Premier and our government have to invest and expand public transit in every community, not only in the greater Toronto and Hamilton area, but right across the province of Ontario.

I also want to take this opportunity to thank local individuals who have been working hard, including my mayor, Maurizio Bevilacqua; John MacKenzie, our commissioner of planning; and city of Vaughan ward 1 councillor Marilyn Iafrate, who had been working very hard for a number of months with the folks at Metrolinx to make sure it’s clearly understood that over the next 10 years approximately 35,000 people will be moving into the area immediately adjacent to where this proposed GO station will be built.

This is a clear indication that our government understands the importance of building public transit not only to meet the demands of today, but for the demands of tomorrow, Speaker, and we’re going to continue with that job.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Michael Harris: The station is right in the minister’s backyard. In fact, the government’s own business case stated that “the benefits which could be realized by a” Kirby-Vaughan “station are not large enough to outweigh the anticipated negative impacts to GO Transit and the economy.”

So I ask again: Why does the minister seem more interested in his backyard station to boost his own political fortunes than in the best interests of transit riders here in the province of Ontario?

Hon. Steven Del Duca: I want to follow up by saying that I’m extraordinarily proud to represent the community of Vaughan here in this Legislature. I look forward to making it very clear to the people of Maple and to the people of Kleinburg and to the people of southern King over the next 15 months that that leader and that party are opposed to building more transit infrastructure in that community.

I will also note—notwithstanding our ambitious plans to continue to build transit in every corner of this province, which that party consistently opposes—that I didn’t actually hear that member from Kitchener–Conestoga ever say a bad word about our decision to build a station at Breslau in his riding, Speaker. Thanks very much.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Be seated, please. Order.

New question?

Hospital funding

M me France Gélinas: My question is for the Premier. Our hospitals are facing an overcrowding crisis that keeps getting worse. Last week, 94-year-old Margaret Otto was brought by ambulance to an overcrowded hospital. Margaret had to lie on a stretcher in the busy emergency room for many long hours. It was noisy. She couldn’t rest. As her daughter, Patricia, said, “It is pretty sad that a woman of her age and in her condition can’t get a room.”

When will the Premier stop forcing seniors like Margaret to be treated in hallways, and do something to solve the overcrowding crisis that they have created?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Minister of Health and Long-Term Care.

Hon. Eric Hoskins: We have a strategy to address the occupancy rates that we see in our hospitals. It includes increasing our investments in the operating budgets as well as making unprecedented capital investments across this province, Mr. Speaker: over $10 billion over the next decade in hospital investments. We’ve increased the operating budgets of hospitals last year alone—or this fiscal year—by nearly half a billion dollars.

It’s important that Ontarians understand that the vast majority of the hospitals in this province routinely and regularly operate within the less-than-100% occupancy rate, Mr. Speaker.

But we know that there’s work to be done. We’re proud of the fact that third parties—CIHI, the Wait Time Alliance, the Fraser Institute—have found year after year that Ontarians are receiving timely access to care. We’re seeing improvements in ER wait times as well.

We know there is more work to be done. Those are the reasons for the investments we’re making.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

M me France Gélinas: Patients in Ottawa, like Margaret Otto, are being treated in hallways. Overcrowding has forced the Queensway Carleton Hospital to cancel 36 planned surgeries in recent months alone.

It is not just the people of Ottawa who are suffering from overcrowding created by this Liberal government. The Ontario Hospital Association says that emergency room wait times in Ontario are the longest on record.

This is our Premier’s legacy: overcrowded hospitals, seniors on stretchers, cancelled surgeries and long wait times for families across the province. As Margaret’s daughter, Patricia, says, “It is a sad state of affairs. Nobody can deny it.”

When will this Premier stop squeezing our hospitals, and put an end to hallway medicine in this province?

Hon. Eric Hoskins: I think it’s important that we acknowledge that we have one of the best health care systems in this country—

Hon. Deborah Matthews: In the world.

Hon. Eric Hoskins: —in the world.

Obviously, the member opposite hasn’t read today’s CIHI report, a third-party report that offers independent, third-party proof that our government has made, and continues to make, tremendous progress since 2003 in improving wait times: 85% of hip replacements in Ontario are completed within the medical benchmark, 6% better than the national average; 81% of knee replacements are within the medical benchmark, 12% better than the national average; 99% of radiation therapy is beginning within the medical benchmark. We also beat the national average on this metric.

It’s consistent with the Fraser report last fall that showed that our wait times in ERs are improving. Despite more patients, we’re seeing reductions in wait times across the board.

Sexual abuse

Mr. Peter Z. Milczyn: My question is for the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care. Yesterday in this House during debate on the Protecting Patients Act, a member from the official opposition said something extremely concerning. The Conservative member from Carleton–Mississippi Mills made comments critical of a zero-tolerance policy for the sexual abuse of patients.

The member said, “zero tolerance,” he finds that “dangerous.” The member went on to say that he believes “consideration of leniency, of understanding and of tolerance.” I found these statements not only shocking—

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Stop the clock for me, please.

Usually in

preambles we set the tone for the policy question, and the member has not done that yet. I’m waiting for that, and it better be fast.

Mr. Peter Z. Milczyn: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I found that statement shocking. Can the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care please explain to this House what exactly a zero-tolerance policy is and how it will protect patients from sexual abuse?

Hon. Eric Hoskins: Thank you to the member for giving me the opportunity to respond to this very important question. Let me be as clear as possible: Our government has a zero-tolerance policy for sexual abuse. That includes zero tolerance for criminal sexual behaviour of any kind, regardless of position, title or occupation. Our government is committed to protecting the safety and well-being of all Ontarians.

As the Minister of Health, my priority is protecting patients. This is exactly why our government has introduced Bill 87, the Protecting Patients Act. Sexual assault and all other forms of sexual abuse by anyone, including health professionals, is absolutely and unequivocally unacceptable. Zero tolerance means just that: zero tolerance for any form of sexual abuse of any kind by anyone, period.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Be seated, please. Be seated, please. Order.

Supplementary?

Mr. Peter Z. Milczyn: I want to thank the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care for the answer.

I remember watching in awe the #WhoWillYouHelp media campaign and understanding that if you are not speaking out, if you are not helping the victim, the survivor, then you’re helping the perpetrator. I’m proud to be part of a government that is standing up for survivors. I’m proud that on this side of the House, we recognize the need for zero tolerance when it comes to sexual abuse and assault.

Mr. Speaker, through you to the minister: Can he please update the House on what we are doing to support survivors of sexual abuse?

Hon. Eric Hoskins: To the Minister of the Status of Women.

Hon. Indira Naidoo-Harris: Mr. Speaker, as you’ve heard, it’s vital that we make it clear: We have zero tolerance for sexual abuse and assault in our society. In fact, there’s no room for leniency. All Ontarians deserve to feel safe from sexual violence and harassment in their communities, workplaces, homes and schools.

But the reality is that one in three women will experience some form of violence in their lifetime, and that’s unacceptable. That’s why we launched It’s Never Okay: An Action Plan to Stop Sexual Violence and Harassment. Our #WhoWillYouHelp and #ItsNeverOkay campaigns challenged existing attitudes and sparked discussions in Ontario and around the world.

But clearly more conversations need to be had in this House. That’s why we are investing $1.7 million in training for front-line workers in health, education and the community. Speaker, we are supporting people who have experienced sexual assault through programs that build partnerships between community—

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you.

New question.

Mental health services

Ms. Lisa MacLeod: My question is to the Attorney General. The government has failed Ontarians suffering from mental health issues in recent months. I just want to point out, in our own city of Ottawa, three suicides within 10 months at the Ottawa detention centre. One man took his own life, and he had been off suicide watch for less than a day when he took his own life.

Mr. Speaker, is this the Ontario that those struggling with mental illness should expect to live in?

Hon. Yasir Naqvi: Thank you very much, Speaker, for the opportunity to answer this very important question. I can tell the member opposite and all of the members of this House that our government is very much focused on making sure that we’ve got the right kind of supports for individuals, with mental health and addictions services.

I know the Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services is very much focused on ensuring that we have appropriate training for our correctional officers around mental health and that we have specialized nurses in our correctional facilities that have training around mental health so that those services can be provided.

The work that is being done through Mr. Howard Sapers, who is the former corrections investigator from the federal government, is very much focused around ensuring that when it comes to dealing with issues around segregation, there are appropriate services available. That work is ongoing, in consultation with the Ministry of Health, so that we have robust services for mental health in our correctional facilities.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Ms. Lisa MacLeod: What concerns me is that clearly the supports and the services aren’t there. One individual “was only in the detention centre because there was no bed available at the Royal Ottawa Mental Health Centre, where he was supposed to be undergoing an assessment.”

Government cuts and neglect of mental health are heartbreaking. I just want to ask the minister: How many more deaths will it take before the government shows real, concrete action with clear supports and clear services for those suffering?

Hon. Yasir Naqvi: Our government continues to make investments in making sure that we’ve got appropriate supports available, not only in our correctional facilities when it comes to supports for mental health, but also at the community level.

The work that my ministry is doing through our bail action plan is very much focused on ensuring that we’ve got appropriate mental health supports available in the community. By working with organizations like, in Ottawa, the John Howard Society, we are making sure that we’ve got more mental health workers at a community level, so those individuals who are low-risk or vulnerable are not being remanded to the Ottawa-Carleton Detention Centre, but are in fact being released under supervision in the community so that they can get appropriate supports.

We have also launched a groundbreaking bail beds program. Ottawa is one of the sites with 20 beds, both for men and women, that will ensure that those accused with complex needs get the appropriate mental health care in the community.

Employment standards

Ms. Cindy Forster: My question is to the Premier. Cafeteria staff at the University of Toronto’s Scarborough campus have been on strike for more than six weeks. They want fairness, they want better schedules, they want better benefits and they want wages that they can actually live on.

Cafeteria workers at York University were able to win a raise bringing them to $15 an hour. They achieved this with no help from the government.

Hard-working Ontarians and businesses have waited long enough for change. You’ve received the submissions for the Changing Workplaces Review. The report is done. Where is it?

Speaker, what is this government prepared to do to transform the lives of these cafeteria workers and all hard-working Ontarians, and when?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Minister of Labour.

Hon. Kevin Daniel Flynn: Thank you to the member for that important question. When there’s a labour dispute, the government and the Ministry of Labour focus on assisting both of those parties. They’ll want to reach an agreement. They assist them with the process. It’s a shared responsibility. We’ve got some of the best mediators, we’ve got some of the best conciliators in the country right here with the Ministry of Labour. They’ve got a tremendous record of drawing parties together, bringing them in and eventually reaching agreement.

We actively encourage the employer, in this case, and the union, in this case, to make every effort they possibly can to resolve those issues where they should be resolved, and that’s at the bargaining table. We’re confident, if those people bring their best to that table, that these parties can reach a settlement that’s in the best interests of the institution and of the people who work there.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Ms. Cindy Forster: Well, I would then say to the labour minister: Why are these people who are making just over minimum wage still on strike?

New Democrats believe that $15 an hour should be the minimum that Ontarians receive for the hard work that they do, and they shouldn’t have to strike to get it. We believe that people should be able to plan their lives with better schedules, with better wages and being able to take time off for sick leave without breaking the bank.

Again, what is the government prepared to do for these cafeteria workers and for all hard-working Ontarians—and when?

Hon. Kevin Daniel Flynn: I don’t think this government needs to take any lessons from the third party on how to resolve labour disputes. We’ve got the Changing Workplace Review under way. We’ve been doing it for two years. The report is almost ready. It’s going to reach this House. The examination that’s being done of these issues simply has not been done in the province of Ontario before.

Some 98% of labour disputes in this province are resolved without a strike and without a lockout. When the NDP was in power, almost a million days a year were lost. So if anybody is going to give anybody lessons on how the collective bargaining process should work, it would not be that party.

I look forward to the input from the third party when the Changing Workplaces Review is made public, which will be in a very short time. They’ll have an opportunity to speak out then, like they should have when we had the minimum wage debate.

Volunteers

Ms. Ann Hoggarth: My question is for the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration. Minister, Ontario depends on the goodwill of volunteers to deliver vital services and build strong, inclusive communities. In my riding of Barrie, a number of constituents have received recognition through your ministry for the outstanding work that they do.

The function of the Honours and Awards Secretariat is integral to recognizing Ontarians across the province for contributing their time to local organizations, such as the Stroke Recovery Association of Barrie; and assisting local community initiatives, like Seasons Centre for Grieving Children, which provides peer-to-peer support for children who are grieving the death of an immediate family member.

Can the minister please tell us more about how the government of Ontario recognizes the outstanding accomplishments and achievements of our volunteers?

Hon. Laura Albanese: I would like, first of all, to thank the member from Barrie for championing volunteers in her community. Each year, more than 12,500 volunteers are celebrated in Ontario through five honours and 12 recognition programs administered by the Honours and Awards Secretariat.

One of the province’s highest honours is the Order of Ontario. Last December, 26 individuals were appointed to the Order of Ontario by the Honourable Elizabeth Dowdeswell, the Lieutenant Governor of Ontario. Recipients include outstanding individuals, such as sprinter Donovan Bailey, who won two gold medals at the 1996 Summer Olympics; and Lisa LaFlamme, the chief anchor of Canada’s CTV National News.

Honours and awards are essential in reflecting the commitment and conviction of volunteers who have a vision for a stronger Ontario.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Ms. Ann Hoggarth: I thank the minister for her answer. Minister, each year Ontarians benefit from the efforts of approximately 4.9 million volunteers. In my riding of Barrie, a large number of my constituents rely on volunteers to deliver vital services, such as providing support to patients recovering from a stroke.

I know that in the past the Royal Victoria Regional Health Centre Auxiliary of Barrie, with over 800 volunteers led by Janice Williams, had access to a program through the ministry to acknowledge volunteers for their enhancement of patient care. I’m sure the minister would agree that it is important to recognize and thank these organizations and individuals that represent the best of our province.

Speaker, can the minister inform this House about the programs that recognize the outstanding contributions of volunteers in our communities?

Hon. Laura Albanese: I again want to thank the member from Barrie. The member is correct. Through our volunteer service awards, both adults and youth are recognized for the length of time that they volunteered for an organization. Last year, 2,200 organizations, including the Barrie Art Club, accessed our program. More than 11,000 volunteers were recognized at 54 different ceremonies across the province.

This year, from March to June, more than 50 ceremonies are being held throughout Ontario in communities to celebrate the contributions of our volunteers. I have written to every member of this House with detailed information about their local ceremonies, and I encourage them to get engaged. It is through these programs that we are able to recognize volunteers across our province for their contributions.

Hospital services

Mrs. Gila Martow: To the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care: The area around Branson hospital has a high concentration of elderly residents, so it’s clear that the Branson site should focus on senior care and include speciality clinics, outpatient mental health services, medical walk-in assessment services, day programs for elderly people and multidisciplinary health promotion and health maintenance programs for local communities.

Shockingly and sadly, the urgent care centre at Branson is scheduled to close this June. Mr. Speaker, how can this government turn its back on these seniors?

Hon. Eric Hoskins: Well, Mr. Speaker—was it Branson?

Interjection: Yes, Branson.

Hon. Eric Hoskins: It wasn’t Brampton? Thank you. I just required that clarification.

I’m not familiar with this specific situation. But on the one hand, I’m happy to talk to the member opposite to get informed, to have a closer understanding. I’ll be doing the same with my staff in the ministry over the course of the day.

Clearly, we provide the opportunity for our local communities and our local hospitals, and those who govern them, to make decisions based on the priorities and the needs of their local community. It’s critically important that, as they make those decisions, they are able to provide that confidence and those assurances to the community where those services that they rely on are going to be provided.

Again, I am not familiar with this specific situation. Perhaps I’ll get more information in the supplementary. Even better, I’d suggest a conversation, so perhaps we could work together to resolve this in a satisfactory way.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary.

Mrs. Gila Martow: I’m happy to discuss it further. I understand that Councillor James Pasternak is going to be speaking to Toronto city council about the issue, so I thought the minister would be aware.

There are concerns that North York General Hospital does not have room to absorb all of the services presently provided to the community at Branson hospital, even if the elderly could make the trip. The Ontario government actually promised medical services to be provided specifically to seniors in this area, just south of my riding of Thornhill.

In addition to seniors, the Branson neighbourhood has a high concentration of new Canadians who value the health care provided at the Branson site.

Will the minister promise today to look into the matter and to ensure that the seniors, new Canadians and the rest of the residents of the Branson area in northern Toronto will not be losing their cherished medical services?

Hon. Eric Hoskins: As the member notes, this is part of North York General Hospital. My understanding from my staff is that the lease on this particular facility for Branson ambulatory is due to expire in 2019. But I’m also told by my staff just now that there’s a confidence that there will be no service loss expected as a result of these changes.

Ring of Fire

Mr. Michael Mantha: My question is to the Premier. This Liberal government has claimed for years to be lobbying Ottawa to match its $1-billion promise to invest in a transportation corridor to the Ring of Fire development. Yet Liberal Nickel Belt MP Marc Serré is quoted this week as saying that the feds can’t do anything until the province has a road plan: “As of today I haven’t seen a road plan. It’s hard to invest on a blank piece of paper. We need a plan.”

Well, who’s right, and where’s the plan?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Minister of Northern Development and Mines.

Hon. Bill Mauro: I appreciate the question from the member. The member is right when he recognizes that on this side of the House, our government has consistently put a significant allocation on the table related to infrastructure build-out in the Ring of Fire. The number is $1 billion. It’s a significant commitment to moving forward with development in the Ring of Fire area.

I would mention to the member that I remember very well, in the election of 2014, that the Ring of Fire was not even mentioned in the NDP platform that first came out when they were rushing forward to take us to the polls.

Speaker, we continue to work on the file in a very significant way.

I understand the member may be trying to link this back to the federal budget that came out last week, which, in his mind, I suppose, did not directly reference investment in the Ring of Fire.

Absolutely, we believe at some point there will be an opportunity here for the federal government to play a role in Ring of Fire development. We are counting on it. We would expect at some point that they will come forward with support for the Ring of Fire.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Michael Mantha: When you invest money to develop natural resources in the north, the entire province benefits from this investment. This Liberal government has been talking about the Ring of Fire for years, but you have nothing—nothing—to show for it.

When is this government going to stop announcing development in the Ring of Fire and actually start developing the Ring of Fire?

Hon. Bill Mauro: Speaker, one of the pieces that has seen some progress, I would reference, is that there was a corridor study completed not that long ago—and while there was not a definitive link or route established through that corridor study, it’s my understanding that that work did yield significant information that will position us well as we move forward on this particular file, in terms of finally defining a particular route. There is some action considered and progress further required, where they want to see a secondary study completed.

It’s my understanding that the first study was very informative in terms of what it yielded, and as well will help us as we move forward with providing community access roads to four or five of the First Nations communities that will ultimately be able to tie into an east-west corridor, if that is ultimately the route that is chosen on the Ring of Fire.

Work is ongoing. Progress is being made. We look forward to the work continuing.

Clean technology

Mr. Arthur Potts: My question is to the Minister of Research, Innovation and Science. Speaker, members in this House know full well how important it is that we embrace manufacturing processes that are less harmful for the environment. I don’t think it’s any secret that many consumers in Ontario are switching to products that are low-carbon. We must support the companies that are investing and innovating these new products.

Embracing clean tech has multiple benefits for our society. It lessens the damage done to the environment by harmful manufacturing processes, and a healthier habitat reduces health-related issues. As well, new technologies will increase the size of the sector, create new companies and jobs, adding to our already stellar GDP growth.

It’s obvious that this sector is important to Ontario’s future and all of our children’s futures. Will the minister please let the members of this House know about his plans to grow Ontario’s clean tech sector?

Hon. Reza Moridi: I want to thank the member from Beaches–East York for that very good question.

Mr. Speaker, the member is right on all accounts. Clean tech is a sector in Ontario that is capable of enormous growth. To support that sector, our 2016 budget announced a $55-million investment to establish the Cleantech Equity Fund, which will be funded through our Business Growth Initiative. This investment will help develop emerging clean tech companies by ensuring innovative firms have the access to capital they need to scale up, hire talent and export globally.

I am glad to see the federal government following our provincial lead. It announced a $380-million clean tech equity fund in their 2017 budget.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Arthur Potts: I want to thank the minister. The work that he is doing to advance innovation in Ontario is absolutely outstanding—worthy of a doctor of physics.

The news is fantastic, Speaker, because it is more important than ever in Ontario to foster the right investment climate to turn local innovation into scaled-up companies and high-quality jobs. I know that Clean Tech North, which is chaired by Bryan Watson, a Beaches–East York constituent, appreciates our vision.

It’s great to see that the government is investing in a business sector that can have a direct impact on all Ontarians’ day-to-day lives. The growth of this sector will allow people to make more environmentally conscious decisions—decisions that consumers can feel good about.

Will the minister please tell the House more about the clean tech sector in Ontario and more about what the government is doing to support the sector?

Hon. Reza Moridi: Again, I want to thank the member from Beaches–East York for that question. Once again, the member is correct. Ontario is home to the largest and the fastest-growing clean tech sector in Canada. Ontario’s clean tech sector is responsible for $8 billion in revenue and employs over 64,000 people in 3,000 companies across our province.

Clean tech in Ontario is a sector of great strategic importance. It has the capacity to generate revenue and to help mitigate environmental damage. Ontario’s highly skilled workforce, vibrant innovation and tech clusters, and geographic position give us a great competitive edge over other jurisdictions. We will continue to invest in our clean tech sector as one of the leaders in our innovative economy.

School closures

Mr. Sam Oosterhoff: My question is to the Minister of Education. Tonight, the Niagara district school board will be voting on whether or not to close down Beamsville District Secondary School, South Lincoln High School and Grimsby Secondary School. Closing these schools would leave enormous holes in the communities of Lincoln, Grimsby and West Lincoln, but there’s still time to do the right thing and listen to the parents, teachers and children in Niagara.

My question to the Minister of Education is this: Will her ministry put a moratorium on the closure of small and rural schools across Ontario until the accommodation review is fixed and the funding formula is amended?

Hon. Mitzie Hunter: I want to thank the member opposite for this question. As I have said in this House as recently as yesterday, an arbitrary moratorium is not the approach. There is no one-size-fits-all solution when it comes to our local schools. We believe in our locally elected school boards because they understand the needs in their local communities. We put in place an accommodation review process that requires school boards to consult with the school community, and that includes with their local municipalities, coterminous boards, students and parents so that they get these locally made decisions right.

This is about ensuring that the locally elected school boards do what is in the best interests of their local schools.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Sam Oosterhoff: My question is back to the Minister of Education. Perhaps the minister won’t listen to the constituents in my riding, but if she’s not going to do the right thing in my riding, perhaps she will listen to the students and parents from the rest of Ontario. Small and rural schools are the backbone of local communities and economies. Students and parents across the province are rightly anxious about the radical, ongoing closures. This Liberal government seems to be doing everything it can to balance their books on the backs of rural schools and their students.

My question to the Minister of Education: When will this government stop trying to balance the budget on the backs of rural students?

Hon. Mitzie Hunter: We know that schools play a vital role in the social fabric that ties our great communities together. I want to say to the member opposite that we are continuing to invest in our schools. Our local schools are really the centre of our communities. We have increased the funding to schools by 59% since 2003.

I also want to point out that in the member’s own riding, we have invested in 12 new and improved schools since 2003. Let me bring to the member’s attention that $8.9 million was spent to build the new Twenty Valley Public School, $11.3 million to build a new Binbrook school and $1.5 million for new childcare spaces. I can go on with a list of 12 new schools in that member’s own riding because we believe in investing in public education here—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Stop the clock. Be seated, please.

New question.

Assisted housing

Ms. Peggy Sattler: My question is to the Premier. Last week in London, I met with four families of adults living with severe physical disability who are in dire need of residential care after suffering stroke or traumatic brain injury. Two of these men are living in hospital, one is living in a retirement home, and one is living at home with his aging and unwell mother, with long-term care his next and only option.

Speaker, these families are desperate and exhausted. They have written to the Minister of Health. They have written to the Deputy Premier. They have met with the South West LHIN and with the Patient Ombudsman. But the wait-lists for assisted living are so long, their loved ones are more likely to die than make it to the top of the list. What does the Premier want me to tell these families?

Hon. Kathleen O. Wynne: Minister of Community and Social Services.

Hon. Helena Jaczek: The types of cases that the member opposite is describing are some of the most challenging. I think we can acknowledge this. There are complex medical issues in a number of these cases. Occasionally, there is mental health overlay, dual diagnosis and so on. For the safety of all concerned, on some occasions, individuals do need the type of support that they will receive in a long-term-care facility or other type of environment.

We know that sometimes there are aging parents involved in these situations. We know that they need the kind of support that is appropriate for their loved ones. In terms of talking about these specific cases, obviously, I cannot do that. But we are certainly aware that we need more supports in appropriate settings.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Ms. Peggy Sattler: In the London area, there are about 500 adults on the waiting list for Cheshire homes, 50 on the Dale Brain Injury Services wait-list for housing supports, and as many as 90 on the housing wait-list at Participation House. They are waiting for LHIN-funded dollars to support their medical needs.

The lack of assisted living options is creating a crisis for families. It is forcing the permanent hospitalization of people who want to live in their communities. It is trapping people who are in the prime of their lives inappropriately in nursing homes.

Will the Premier commit today to increasing the number of assisted living placements in the South West LHIN so that these adults, and others like them with complex medical needs, can live with dignity in the kind of housing they deserve?

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Stop the clock. Be seated, please. Thank you.

Minister?

Hon. Helena Jaczek: Minister of Health and Long-Term Care.

Hon. Eric Hoskins: These individual cases remind us of just how important it is that we harness all the resources possible to provide them with the respect, dignity and the supports that they require to live full, independent and beneficial lives for themselves, and being part of their communities. We know that there’s more work to be done.

There has, I think the member opposite would acknowledge—and she referenced two organizations as well, Participation House and Cheshire homes, that have made extraordinary impacts in that process, in association with other community organizations. There is a role to be played by multiple partners, when we talk about assisted living as well and the supportive housing that’s required. I will take these examples—and I know that there is a role for our LHINs as well—to see how we might be able to make a difference in these particular instances, but also more generally.

Financial literacy

Ms. Daiene Vernile: My question is for the M