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

August 1, 2018

42nd Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard (PDF) 01-AUG-2018_L013

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Wednesday 1 August 2018 Mercredi 1 er août 2018

Notices of reasoned amendments

Orders of the Day

Government policies / Politiques du gouvernement

Introduction of Visitors

Decorum in chamber

Oral Questions

Municipal government

Municipal government

Social assistance

Anti-racism activities

Social assistance

Social assistance

Curriculum

Social assistance

Taxation

Municipal elections

Taxation

Social assistance

Economic development

Curriculum

Agriculture industry

Member’s comments

Introduction of Visitors

Members’ Statements

Social assistance

Greek community

United Way Centraide North East Ontario

Fire in Arthur

Emancipation Day

Addiction services

Music festivals in Simcoe North

Emancipation Day

Religious minorities in Afghanistan

Warsaw Uprising

Motions

Committee sittings

Committee membership

Petitions

Municipal elections

Long-term care

Municipal government

Employment standards

School boards

Municipal elections

Orders of the Day

Cap and Trade Cancellation Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 annulant le programme de plafonnement et d’échange

Private members’ public business

Cap and Trade Cancellation Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 annulant le programme de plafonnement et d’échange

The House met at 0900.

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

Prayers.

Notices of reasoned amendments

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I beg to inform the House that, pursuant to standing order 71(c), the member for Toronto–Danforth and the member for Scarborough–Guildwood have filed with the Clerk reasoned amendments to the motion for second reading of Bill 5,

An Act to amend the City of Toronto Act, 2006, the Municipal Act, 2001 and the Municipal Elections Act, 1996. The order for second reading of Bill 5 may therefore not be called today.

Orders of the Day

Government policies / Politiques du gouvernement

Resuming the debate adjourned on July 31, 2018, on the motion regarding government priorities.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Further debate? The member for Whitby, I think, had the floor when we last dealt with this. The member for Whitby.

Mr. Lorne Coe: It’s a pleasure to continue the debate on government order 2. For the benefit of our viewers, I want to read into the record government order 2: “That, in the opinion of this House, the current government is a government for the people with a clear mandate to pursue policies that put more money in people’s pockets; create and protect jobs; address the hydro crisis; reduce hospital wait times; and restore accountability and trust in government.”

With respect to the last aspect that I just read of government order 2, “restore accountability and trust in government,” I’d like to turn to the initiative of the government in passing legislation to end the strike at York University.

Speaker, you will know that in the last session, I had the privilege for a better part of two years to be the official opposition critic for education and post-secondary education. In that particular capacity, I travelled the province to visit every community college campus and university campuses and engage with not only the academic staff and the administration staff, but also students and teachers at each particular outlet.

But in the discussions at York University, it became clear that students needed to be in class. They needed to be in class. We needed to save the fall semester for those students. Some 45,000 students were affected. Can you imagine? Forty-five thousand students.

So, given the action of this government in concluding the strike, York University will now be able to resume normal operations and students will soon be able to complete their winter courses, as they should. Getting the York University students back to class, Speaker, as you know and as others in this Legislative Assembly know, was a top priority for the government. We have delivered. Once again, we have delivered on a promise to protect students and their families by passing legislation to end the longest post-secondary strike in Canadian history quickly and fairly. Promises made, promises kept.

During this process at York University, we heard loud and clear from the people of Ontario; particularly, in fact, from students and their families—lots of emails, lots of telephone calls—that action was needed. Action was needed now to end the disruptive strike. I and others in the Ontario Progressive Conservative caucus are glad to see thousands of students heading back to class and being able to conclude their studies and fulfill their particular objectives going forward.

I’m conscious of the time that I have remaining, which is about a minute and 12 seconds, so I’d like to turn to another aspect of government order 2, and that is putting more money in people’s pocket. Yesterday and in the days before, we talked about ending the cap-and-trade carbon tax here in Ontario. Every cent spent from the cap-and-trade slush fund is money that we know historically was taken out of the pockets of Ontario families and businesses. Cap-and-trade and carbon tax schemes are no more than government cash grabs that do nothing for the environment, while hitting people in the wallet in order to fund big government programs. Promises made, promises kept.

Yesterday when I spoke—I’m going to conclude—I talked about the late American president John F. Kennedy. He said this: “Change is the law of life. And those who look only to the past or the present are certain to miss the future.”

Well, it’s clear, Speaker, that this government has a mandate for change and we’re progressing down that path. We will today and we will in the weeks and months ahead.

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

Miss Monique Taylor: I am pleased to rise to speak on behalf of the people of Hamilton Mountain.

Since this is the first portion of debate for me, I would like to take the time to thank the people of Hamilton Mountain who have chosen me to represent them here at Queen’s Park. From the bottom of my heart, I thank them for the trust that they have shown in me by re-electing me to a third term. I also want to thank the members of my campaign team who, over the course of the campaign, put in extraordinary effort, working 12 or more hours a day, each and every day.

It was a tough haul, but it was made all the easier with a platform that offered change for the better and hope for our future; a message that was delivered with class, integrity and an undeniable commitment by our leader, Andrea Horwath, a person who, of course, is well known to the people of Hamilton Mountain.

Beyond the immediate team we of course had an energetic and resourceful team of volunteers who came to help with various tasks in the campaign. Whether it be canvassing their neighbours or on the doorstep or by making phone calls, doing office work or putting up signs, they were always there to do what was needed. None of what we achieved—it couldn’t have been possible without the hundreds of volunteers that it takes to make a campaign tick. Through it all, not for one minute did any one of those hundreds of people think that they were doing it for any other reason than for the people—the people that I now again represent.

I knew when I first came here in 2011 that I was here for the people. I knew, when I first decided to run for office, that I was doing it for the people. And through the last seven years, that has always been my reason for getting up in the morning: the people. That is why we are all elected and that is what we do as MPPs. And in that role, I find myself here today speaking to a motion that starts with the words, “in the opinion of this House, the current government is a government for the people.” And I wonder why this government feels the burning need to say this phrase over and over and over again.

There’s an old saying, Speaker, that if you say something often enough, it becomes the truth, regardless of whether there is any merit to what is being said. I would suggest that this barrage of “for the people” is not only an empty slogan but it is one that indicates the exact opposite of what is playing out before us.

Throughout the election campaign and in the days since, we have seen example after example of a government that shows no respect for the people and the democratic process that put the power in their hands. During the campaign, they put voters in the position of having to make up their minds without any real plan from the Conservatives and with no information of the costing of what they said they would do.

The first step in being “for the people” is showing respect for the people. And I’ve seen enough evidence from this Premier to say that he is sadly lacking in this regard. He refused to clearly outline what he would do during the campaign. During the leader’s debate, he told voters that they should talk to their boss to find out who they should vote for. In fact, he said it twice, maybe even more. How disrespectful can you be? “You don’t need to worry your little heads about any details of my plan, and make sure you check in with your boss before voting.” And he’s for the people? Seriously? I’m not quite so sure.

Voters in Ontario deserve to be treated with respect. They have minds of their own and they can decide for themselves. They need the details to be able to do that—they don’t need to ask their boss who to vote for—details that this government and this Premier denied them through the entire four weeks of the campaign. Now, in the early days of this government, we see that same disrespectful attitude continuing, a cavalier approach to barrelling ahead with wrong-headed ideas, sparing little thought for their consequences.

We have a sex ed curriculum that has been working fine since 2015, yet this government has decided that we should roll things back to 1998, when the curriculum was last updated. This decision makes it clear that this government is only for some of the people; in fact, a very small proportion of the people who seem to have the Premier’s ear.

I have certainly heard from people about this rollback of our curriculum—many of them, in fact—and I’d like to share some of that with you today. Here’s an email I’ve received in my constituency office: “I am writing to you this morning to voice my deep concerns in the elimination of the current sexual education curriculum that Premier Ford is putting forth.

“I am a mother of two boys in the elementary school system and an employee of a women’s shelter and I know that teaching our children about consent, healthy relationships with oneself and each other, cyberbullying, same-sex relationships and so much more is critical in the development of these children and their relationships.

“We need a current, relevant curriculum in place so we do not fail our children. Girls and women are sexually harassed, raped and murdered at an alarming rate in our country, and consent and the cycle of abuse needs to be taught—age-appropriately—throughout the elementary years before they get to high school.

“My kids are fortunate that my husband and I will continue to keep these conversations in our home so that they are aware of healthy relationships but as we all know, not all parents are this comfortable, or will talk to their kids about sex and all of the other topics and, as well, many kids are growing up in abusive homes where they will only learn unhealthy ways to communicate and show love.”

Carly, another constituent of Hamilton Mountain, said this: “The old curriculum has not been updated since 1998 and is incredibly exclusive. It doesn’t cover topics that are so important in 2018—online bullying, sexting, same-sex marriage, gender identity etc.

“I want to live in a province that is focused on moving forward and improving the future of our children. We are literally moving backwards. We aren’t teaching inclusivity. We aren’t showing children that love takes different forms. We aren’t helping children see the ways bullying impacts a life.”

These are just some of the comments that I’ve received on this topic, and I know members opposite have received similar emails and phone calls that are voicing the same or similar concerns.

The Premier now says that consultation will be done, starting in September, before a decision is made on what will be the new curriculum. I know many people that I’ve spoken to are anxious to take

part in those consultations, but given the Premier’s actions over the past couple of weeks and last Friday in particular, I’m not sure that I have much faith in how far those consultations will go.

I’m referring, of course, to the Premier’s unilateral decision to completely steamroll over our municipal democratic process here in Toronto and in the regions of Niagara, Peel, York and Muskoka. He’s doing this because he’s “spoken to people.” Well, I don’t know who all he’s spoken to, but it certainly doesn’t describe a consultation.

Less than two months after a provincial election that made him the Premier, an election in which this was never raised, he is using his provincial power to interfere in a municipal election and to settle old scores with political enemies. In the middle of the campaign, he is changing the rules, with no warning and no consultation.

He is stripping the city of Toronto of the authority to set its own ward boundaries—boundaries that were previously set with considerable consultation with the people of Toronto. And he is limiting the access of the people of Toronto to their city councillors.

He is denying the people of Muskoka, Peel, York and Niagara the ability to vote for their own regional chair. Let that sink in. On July 26, the people in those regions were weighing up which candidate they were going to vote for. On July 27, they found out that the Premier of our province said that they will no longer have that say. It’s an abuse of power and an affront to democracy—democracy, a system in which the supreme power is vested in the people. And this from a government claiming to be a “government for the people.”

I’ll be honest: On the night of June 7, I was worried about what lay ahead for Ontario. But I never thought that I would be witness to such hypocrisy in this chamber, and certainly not within a few weeks of this government’s mandate. Each day that passes, it becomes increasingly clear that this government is only for some of the people. It certainly doesn’t appear to be the government of First Nations people or the Indigenous people of Ontario.

Let me share some of the words of Tessa, another constituent of Hamilton Mountain:

“I am writing this email as a teacher, Ontarian and as a witness and supporter of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

“I wish to voice my disgust and dismay that the newly elected Premier of Ontario has cancelled the TRC curriculum-writing project, meant to support teachers as we take on our duty of bearing witness and facilitating the calls to action of the TRC.

“We cannot allow the systemic racism and ‘othering’ of the FNMI people to continue, and yet, Mr. Ford has clearly, yet again, demonstrated his archaic and discriminatory views through his actions.

“I trust you will speak on my behalf and stand as a witness as well, insisting that our Premier takes up the calls to action and reverses this poor decision.”

The work of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission was a critical undertaking. It must be respected if we are ever to properly grow as a province and a country. The truths were painful and difficult—painful for those who lived through the horrors of the residential school system and those who continue to suffer as a result. To say it was a difficult time would do the experience a disservice; it was much more than difficult. But it was difficult to listen to those testimonies. How could humans act in such a way to fellow humans? But we had to listen, and we’re better for it, painful as it is.

The reconciliation will take years, decades, perhaps generations, but it must be a serious part of our school curriculum, and it must be a serious part of the work of this government. Instead, this government removed the reference of reconciliation and folded the Ministry of Indigenous Affairs in with the Ministry of Energy, Northern Development and Mines. Those are not the actions of a government for the people.

This is not a government for the people who desperately need mental health services. Last spring, in the face of 12,000 children and youth waiting a year or more for mental health services, the Legislative Assembly voted unanimously—Speaker, as you know, because I believe you voted for it also—in support of my motion to eliminate those wait-lists. Many of those who voted in favour of that motion are now sitting on the government benches across the way.

And I wonder what has changed because instead of taking action to make that a reality, this government will scrap the previously promised $2.1 billion over four years for mental health and replace it with $1.9 billion over 10 years. That’s a cut of $330 million each year to mental health and addictions funding.

What about those people living on social assistance who for years have been absolutely unable to make ends meet? I was going to say struggled to make ends meet, but that would suggest that they managed with difficulty. The fact is that they don’t make ends meet. Every month they go without: They go without food, they go without the clothing they need or the heat they need in their home; they go without the dental care or drugs they need to stay healthy. And just yesterday, we heard that those people will no longer receive the 3% increase that they were promised, and will only get 1.5% instead.

On top of this, the government announced that they would be ending the Basic Income Pilot, which has been operating in my home city of Hamilton, as well as Brantford, Lindsay and Thunder Bay. We’re just over one year into a three-year pilot program that gave a sustainable future for so many low-income families. How can a program possibly be evaluated in such a short time? Because it’s not just about the money, it’s about how the program is able to turn people’s lives around. It’s about the impact that it has on their health and, of course, on our health care system and so much more.

But this government, with the stroke of a pen, just cancels it and strips away all the hope with absolutely no consultation. Has the minister ever come to Hamilton to talk to some of the people who are on the Basic Income Pilot? Probably not.

So no, this is not a government for those people who need our help the most.

Speaker, neither is this a government for the people who care about our environment and are concerned about climate change. Tackling climate change requires a global response, and with the Cap and Trade Cancellation Act, this government is shirking its responsibilities to Ontarians now and into the future. There are no commitments to lowering greenhouse gas emissions—a move that takes us backwards. Contracts are being ripped up and this new legislation ensures any compensation will be kept to a bare minimum.

A few weeks back, the government was forced to change the deadlines for access to the Green Ontario Fund because they clearly had no idea of the timelines involved in the home renovation business. Even with the extended deadlines, there will still be people left high and dry after thinking that they would get a rebate on the work being done—work that would save energy.

I hear from people in the process of buying an electric car, but will no longer be able to afford them and will lose their deposit in the thousands of dollars.

Then there’s the $100 million that was going to fund school maintenance and repairs from the fund—$2.15 million of it was for the Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board—gone, just like that. Thanks to an extremely flawed funding formula brought in by the Conservatives and continued by the Liberals, our schools are in disrepair to the tune of billions of dollars. That $100 million was badly needed and now it’s gone.

And all of this with no consultation—barrel forward, rip up the contracts and deny any compensation.

This also is not a government for 80% of Ontarians who say they want hydro in public hands. The Premier made a big thing during the campaign about how he would get rid of the so-called six-million-dollar man. What he didn’t say in the process is that he would now be a nine-million-dollar man. We don’t know the details of that backroom deal that was struck, but what we do know is that the people of Ontario want to know what is in that deal for the CEO and the board of directors.

We in the NDP have tried to get a full disclosure of all the compensation, but that was denied by the government. This self-proclaimed “government for the people” won’t tell the people what was discussed or decided.

Meanwhile, the real problem with hydro, the fact that it has been privatized, is allowed to carry on: no real control, no accountability, no transparency, and ever-increasing prices for hydro users.

These are just some of the people that this government is clearly not for. Unfortunately, I have little doubt that we will continue to see more examples as the weeks and months go by.

Before I finish, I want to briefly touch on another aspect of this motion, and that is the idea that this government has a “clear mandate.” Nothing could be further from the truth. First is the obvious fact that with 40% of votes cast, it is hard to argue that it is a “clear mandate.” More people voted for another party than voted for the government. They got about 2.3 million votes from a voting population of over 10 million. Those numbers don’t say “clear mandate” to me or anyone else who looks at them rationally.

On top of that is a serious challenge in understanding exactly what those 2.3 million voted for when the Conservatives spent the entire campaign with no platform. Yes, they voted for you, but I can guarantee you they didn’t vote for the government to do everything or most of what they are currently doing. Some will have voted for them for some of it; some will have voted for them for none of it.

This motion is a joke. After cutting off debate on actual legislation, we are spending time discussing a motion that is no more than continued sloganeering from a government acting like a bunch of chest-thumping prizefighters. This government imposed time allocation on legislation that was before this House for no reason other than to curtail the ability of elected MPPs to speak to it, a job that we were sent here to do for the people. Just in case they haven’t paid attention, Speaker, that’s democracy.

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

Ms. Jill Dunlop: I’m honoured to rise today in this historic and magnificent building as a newly elected member of the Ontario Legislature and as the new representative for the electoral district of Simcoe North. I am proud to be joining Premier Ford’s team as one of 76 Ontario Progressive Conservative members. This is a team that is ready to restore responsibility, accountability and trust to government; a team that continues to fulfill its promises; a team that has already demonstrated a swift and efficient action plan; a team that will continue to deliver meaningful results to the people of Ontario.

I would also like to express my sincerest appreciation and gratitude to the constituents of Simcoe North for selecting me to be their new voice at Queen’s Park. Simcoe North has always been my home, and I am truly grateful to have the opportunity to work towards the betterment of this riding and this province.

I would like to take a moment to recognize all of the wonderful people that volunteered on my campaign.

I want to first thank my campaign manager, Stu Spiers. Stu provided me wisdom and guidance throughout my campaign. He was a true team captain.

I was also very fortunate to have a group of incredibly hard-working, compassionate and approachable volunteers working in my campaign offices. Darylene, Joanne, Mary and Judy ensured that every visitor to our offices felt welcome and comfortable. Uncle Doug Reed resumed his place in the Midland bunker, as he does for every federal and provincial election.

To my sign crew—Frank, Bob, Bill, Jim, Don and Walter—I can’t thank them enough for their tireless hard work. Simcoe North is a very large riding, and these gentlemen spent weeks driving all around it while putting up signs, and then again to take them all down.

My dedicated canvassers were legendary. John, Cam, Don and Leah were an essential part of my team. They battled through rain, hail and snow. They walked kilometre after kilometre, in temperatures ranging from minus-30- to plus-30-degree heat. There were days in January when residents suggested that it might be better to come back and campaign in May, but I promised them I would be back again then.

Lastly, Mr. Speaker, I want to acknowledge my parents. My parents are no strangers to campaigns. Plain and simple, my parents work very, very hard. They care about their community as much as they care about their family. They sacrificed a significant amount of time to assist with my campaign, and I am forever grateful for their love and support.

The success of any election campaign is a result of a true team effort. I stand here today as a testament to the generosity of these hard-working individuals.

Mr. Speaker, I would also like to take this time to congratulate my new colleagues on both sides of the House. Election campaigns, as we all know, are no easy task, and I applaud all of you for your resilience and determination. It is a privilege to be surrounded by so many knowledgeable, compassionate and hard-working members. I look forward to our collaboration in the months and years ahead.

As is customary during one’s maiden speech, I would now like to share a few words about my riding of Simcoe North. In 1912, Stephen Leacock first published Sunshine Sketches of a Little Town. He wrote of a charming and quaint lakeside community known as Mariposa. His stories endearingly capture the adventures and challenges experienced by the many characters of this small, rural town. It is often the strength and unity of Mariposa’s community members that allow them to find positive solutions when faced with difficult circumstances.

Mr. Speaker, many now believe that Leacock’s depiction of Mariposa was influenced by a number of communities and landmarks in what is now the modern-day electoral district of Simcoe North. This is fitting, as Stephen Leacock’s message of community, solidarity and friendship still ring true in this area today. Simcoe North is a quintessential representation of small-town, rural Ontario. Simcoe North is a culturally and geographically diverse area of the province. Our riding has a population of approximately 121,000 people. This number is continually growing as we welcome newcomers from all around the world.

Within our boundaries are beautiful Georgian Bay, Lake Simcoe and Lake Couchiching, all connected by the Trent-Severn Waterway. We also have a great number of other small lakes, rivers and streams that are enjoyed by tourists and locals as well. In our riding are a number of provincial parks, including Mara, McRae Point, Bass Lake and Awenda Provincial Parks. These provincial parks provide excellent opportunities for families to experience the great outdoors while camping, fishing and swimming.

The rolling hills of Oro-Medonte are home to three of Ontario’s most popular skiing destinations, these being the downhill ski resorts of Horseshoe Valley ski resort and Mount St. Louis Moonstone.

Hardwood Ski and Bike has over 100 kilometres of beautiful rolling trails through hardwood and pine forests for cross-country skiing and mountain biking. We also have an extensive network of biking, hiking and snowshoe trails. Ontario trails link our riding from Ramara township to the town of Midland.

The riding is comprised of the municipal governments of the city of Orillia, the towns of Midland and Penetanguishene, as well as the townships of Severn, Ramara, Oro-Medonte, Tiny and Tay.

Mr. Speaker, I’m also very proud that within our electoral district are two First Nation communities. These communities are the Chippewas of Rama First Nation and Beausoleil First Nation on Christian Island.

This past weekend, I had the pleasure of attending a traditional headdress ceremony at Beausoleil First Nation. I thank the residents of Christian Island for welcoming me into their community and sharing their unique perspectives with me. I was honoured to celebrate the sanctioning of the new custom headdress for the Beausoleil First Nation. The headdress serves as a significant symbol of strength, bravery and individuality. While the headdress is certainly beautiful, it most strongly represents the virtue of traditions and customs.

I gain valuable knowledge from everyone I talk to, every time I visit. So thank you for being so gracious in engaging in open dialogue with me. I’m also planning to meet with their youth council in the coming weeks.

Simcoe North is also home to the largest French-Canadian community in central Ontario, in the Lafontaine-Penetanguishene region. Last month, I was delighted to attend the Festival du Loup in Lafontaine. The festival was a celebration of French-Canadian language, culture and music.

Je suis honorée de pouvoir travailler aux côtés de nos communautés aborigènes et francophones dans le but de faire reconnaître et respecter leur héritage culturel et linguistique.

I look forward to working alongside our Aboriginal and French-Canadian communities in Simcoe North to continually support and uphold their distinct languages and cultural history. And I promise my French will get better.

Our riding has a number of primary employment industries, including agriculture, tourism, the service industry and small manufacturing. I am proud of our government’s mandate to create and protect jobs in Ontario. In particular, I look forward to promoting and supporting skilled trades in our riding to create better jobs for my constituents.

Simcoe North is also home to a number of post-secondary institutions. We are pleased to have Georgian College campuses in Midland and Orillia, as well as a Lakehead University campus in Orillia.

As a mother of three and a former Georgian College faculty member, I recognize the challenges facing our emerging workforce and the environment our students are graduating into. I believe that we need to build strong partnerships between education, employers and their communities to support and engage our youth, newcomers and new businesses.

Simcoe North is home to the Ontario Provincial Police headquarters, as well as the OPP central region headquarters. My partner, Steve Cartwright, is a sergeant with the OPP and has served for 28 years. I am thankful that my government is committed to providing the resources and training to keep police officers safe and reduce violence in our communities. We will listen to and respect our police officers and front-line workers.

This past week, Premier Ford was the first Premier to ever attend a graduation ceremony at the Ontario Police College in Aylmer, Ontario.

My riding is home to nine Royal Canadian Legion branches. In fact, we have so many Remembrance Day services and a limited number of pipes and drums bands, that the services are spread out over two weeks. Legion branches and the ladies’ auxiliary are a vital part of our communities across Ontario and Canada. They are committed to making a difference in the lives of veterans and their families, providing essential services in our communities and remembering the men and women who sacrificed for our country. Our party will always have a profound respect for our veterans, soldiers and police.

Our hospitals in Simcoe North include Georgian Bay General Hospital in Midland and Soldiers’ Memorial Hospital in Orillia. Georgian Bay General Hospital is thrilled to open their newly renovated emergency department next month that will better serve the residents of Midland and area and provide better working conditions for doctors, nurses and all staff at the hospital.

Also within our riding is Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care in Penetanguishene. Waypoint is one of Canada’s leading mental health facilities, providing exceptional mental health care and research. Waypoint provides the province’s only high-security forensic health program for patients served by both the justice and health care systems.

I am proud of our government’s commitment to improving mental health services in Ontario and of our pledge to spend $1.9 billion, matched with the federal contribution for a combined total of $3.8 billion, over 10 years.

We also have a provincial-government-managed maximum security prison in the riding. Central North Correctional Centre has a capacity of over 1,800 inmates and offers rehabilitation and education programs for male and female inmates. I’ve had the opportunity to tour the facility during my years at Georgian College with my students. But, more recently, I met and toured with management and correctional officers.

The previous Liberal government left corrections in a crisis. The PC government recently committed to hiring more correctional workers, as well as probation and parole officers, to end the crisis. In fact, our Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services, Minister Tibollo, attended the Correctional Officer Training and Assessment graduation in Hamilton last week. Some 182 men and women graduated to become correctional officers and are being deployed as of Monday this week. Correctional workers finally have a government who will listen and end the crisis in corrections.

Our riding is also home to Casino Rama, the only First Nations resort casino in the province. Located on Rama First Nation, a progressive community rich in history, the property was built and designed to pay homage to the culture and proud heritage of Rama First Nation. Celebrating 20 successful years, the resort casino has become a major source of employment in my riding, engaging more than 2,500 crew members in over 340 different types of positions. The resort continues to benefit Simcoe North’s tourism through its outstanding entertainment attractions.

Mr. Speaker, Simcoe North has a wonderful community of artists. Charles Pachter, one of Canada’s leading contemporary artists, resides in the riding, and is transforming the local landscape and architecture. Charles is an Officer of the Order of Canada, a member of the Order of Ontario and holds honorary doctorates from Brock University, OCAD University and the University of Toronto. His iconic Canadian work includes the mural Hockey Knights in Canada, which can be seen in Toronto’s College subway station, and his famous images of the royal family, moose and maple leaf flag are pop icons of Canadian art.

Folk music hero Gordon Lightfoot also grew up in the riding. Lightfoot is a member of the Canadian Songwriters Hall Of Fame and a recent recipient of the Queen Elizabeth II Diamond Jubilee Medal and the Governor General’s Performing Arts Award. He is a Canadian icon, and continues to make musical appearances in his hometown of Orillia. Just recently, Mr. Lightfoot made an appearance at the annual Mariposa Folk Festival.

Simcoe North is also home to an Ontario landmark to cottage-goers and the travelling public, a must-have as you enter Muskoka: Webers, on Highway 11. During the campaign, I was able to grab a cheeseburger and a milkshake with Premier Ford as we met with cottagers and the Webers cooking staff. Simcoe North is a beautiful area of the province, and I encourage all of you to visit it when you have an opportunity.

Mr. Speaker, as previously mentioned, in support of our government’s commitment to create and protect jobs, one of my primary objectives as an MPP is to improve the existing skilled trades framework in Simcoe North and throughout the province. During the election campaign, I met with representatives from a wide range of businesses, including small construction company owners, a hardware store entrepreneur, the Weber Manufacturing president, a Magna divisional president and two marina general managers.

Every person I talked to identified a shortage of well-educated and well-trained tradespeople as a key obstacle to sustaining or growing their business. Additionally, everyone acknowledged that the shortage is getting worse and that immediate actions need to be identified and executed. These meetings and conversations reinforced that this issue is impacting all trades in a wide variety of skilled-trades-related businesses.

In response to this message, last week I tabled a motion calling for our government to respond to this important issue. I was thrilled that this motion was given support by our government. I look forward to collaborating with the Ministry of Education, the Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities and the Ministry of Economic Development, Job Creation and Trade, on this tremendous policy opportunity.

As a result of the positive response by our government, a number of skilled trades organizations contacted me expressing incredible enthusiasm for the future of skilled trades in Simcoe North, and in Ontario as a whole. I also received a number of emails, messages and tweets from a number of organizations: the Ontario Chamber of Commerce; the Ramara, Gananoque and Simcoe chambers of commerce; Merit Ontario; the Ontario Home Builders’ Association; the Kingston Home Builders Association; Trillium auto dealers; the Progressive Contractors Association of Canada; and the Ontario Skilled Trades Alliance.

Our party campaigned on a promise to create and protect jobs, to respect the taxpayer, to reduce gas prices and lower hydro bills and to open Ontario for business. Already our government is upholding these commitments and promises. With the passing of Bill 2, our government has proven its commitment to transparency and respect for the Ontario taxpayer. Our government has taken meaningful steps towards reducing hydro rates and restoring trust and accountability in government.

As a former Georgian College instructor, I am very pleased that our government has ended one of Canada’s longest-ever university strikes. Some 45,000 York University students were impacted by this strike. Students are paying for higher education and deserve to be back in the classroom.

Additionally, our party campaigned with a clear commitment to eliminate the cap-and-trade carbon tax. Once again, promise made, promise kept. Mr. Speaker, our government is taking a giant step forward through the Cap and Trade Cancellation Act. Eliminating the cap-and-trade carbon tax will save families in Ontario an average of $260 per year. It is also an essential step for reducing gas prices by 10 cents per litre.

Mr. Speaker, for those of you who don’t know me, I grew up in a political family. My father, Garfield, was the former MPP for Simcoe North, serving from 1999 to 2015. My mother, Jane, has served two terms as a councillor in the township of Severn, and I’m very excited to announce that she was just acclaimed as the deputy mayor. I have been campaigning since the age of five—not specifically for this election—but this is where my love and respect of politics began.

I’m honoured to be the first-ever female elected as an MPP in Simcoe North. This is especially important to me as a mother of three independent, hard-working, intelligent and incredibly thoughtful daughters. Yes, I am a proud mother. Two of my daughters will be attending the University of Toronto this fall. Rachel, my eldest, is studying history, and my middle daughter, Karley, is studying commerce at the Rotman School of Management. My youngest daughter, Madison, is entering grade 11 at Orillia Secondary School. Two of my daughters have previously been pages in the House. I want a better Ontario for my daughters and for all young people.

It’s not the government that makes Ontario great. Ontario is great because of the people. Our people are smart, kind and, above all, striving to create a better life for themselves and their families. Government’s job is to create the conditions for those people to flourish. Sadly, that is not the case for many in our province.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to be part of a government that has already proven we will keep our promise and listen to the people of Ontario and front-line workers to make life more affordable in Ontario.

Interjections.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Please be seated. Further debate.

Applause.

Ms. Jennifer K. French: Thank you to the member from Bruce–Grey–Owen Sound for his encouragement, although I don’t need too much encouragement to undertake this morning’s debate. I’m looking forward to sharing our thoughts on this government motion.

I’m happy to read the motion so that we are all on the same page, so to speak: “That, in the opinion of this House, the current government is a government for the people, with a clear mandate to pursue policies that put more money in people’s pockets; create and protect jobs; address the hydro crisis; reduce hospital wait times; and restore accountability and trust in government.” That’s the text of the motion and I’m very glad to be able to take it apart, and debate and discuss.

This motion, Speaker, holds this government up to be a government for the people. We hear that ad nauseam, I would say: a “government for the people.” But I would argue that it is indeed a government for their people. I am going to proceed to make that argument.

But first, I’d like to share with you something that happened in my riding on Sunday. I had the opportunity to attend an annual rally that they call the LIFE Rally. That stands for “love is for everyone.” It is a group of community members who have come together, I would say organically, through the years, every Sunday from 1 p.m. to 3 p.m. at the corner of John and Simcoe, and they give free hugs, free conversations and free sandwiches.

They hold signs that say, “Ask me why I’m giving out free sandwiches.” People from across the community, those living in the margins or those just driving by, have understood that this group is trying to build a bit of community. Well, they had their annual rally, where they had free haircuts and they gave out food. Many different faith groups were there giving out free food to our street-involved community, to those living in the margins and those living with challenges. But I wonder: This Premier and this government, are they for those people? Are those people part of their people?

At that LIFE Rally, constituents asked me about social assistance, they asked me about the promised 3% increase and they were quite concerned. At that point, on Sunday, all I had to go on was what we had heard in this House.

In response to a question asked by my colleague from Ottawa Centre about whether those on Ontario Works and ODSP recipients would receive the increases in support that they were indeed counting on, at that time, on July 19, the Minister of Children, Community and Social Services said: “As you are well aware, I’ve got five ministries coming into one ... I’m still being briefed, as I mentioned, on all aspects of my portfolio, but this is a very important one and I want to make sure that the people, particularly the most vulnerable, in our province and in our city are looked after....

“Let’s face it, true income security in this province will be a job, and we will continue to make sure that people are getting the supports they need in order to work and keep more money that they have....

“We want to make sure that Ontario is open for business, more people are working in this province and life is more affordable when they drive their car, when they buy their house or when they send their kid off to university. That’s what our focus is going to be—but I can assure you of one thing: Ontario’s back.”

When I shared this with one man who had worked for years, then suffered a health-related injury and is now on ODSP—he is not a man who will be able to benefit from a job, he is not a man who is worried about car payments, mortgage payments or sending a child to university. This is a government that talks about “a hand up, not a handout.” They say it like that’s a statement to be proud of, instead of recognizing that people aren’t asking for hand ups or handouts, they’re asking to put one foot in front of the other to be able to just find a path without discrimination and derision, a path with dignity, so that they can indeed participate in our communities.

I’d like to read parts from, actually, three letters. There’s a gentleman in my community named Arnaldo. He’s very active in our community and is someone who is also on social assistance. Life has taken a turn for this gentleman. I will read part of his letters:

“My name is Arnaldo. I am 56 years old. I live in Oshawa, Ontario. The reason that I am writing to you is the fact that I had it all at one point—employment, a fiancée, a car. Now, I have nothing. I don’t have employment, or a fiancée, or a car. I am living in poverty. I am on ODSP and CPP-D and making approximately $1,100 a month. That is lower than the minimum wage. Under all the rules and regulations I must follow, where does it say that I must live in poverty? I have depression, anxiety. I never have a smile on my face. I used to be the life of the party.”

“I am not being heard. My opinion seems not important ... I am losing out because I am on ODSP and CPP-D.”

“The reason I am writing to you is because of ODSP.... I have to pay extra. ODSP does not cover needle and lancets for diabetics.... I feel that I am not important. My story does not mean anything.... I would like some answers in a positive manner” and “an increase of ODSP funding so” that I can “live in dignity.... Make some noise and get the Ford government to be accountable to all citizens of Ontario, not a select few. There are four years. I don’t want to wait four years with no positive answers or changes....

“Thanks,

“Arnaldo.”

I pulled that from three letters. We’ve been advocating for this gentleman for years with the previous government. Unfortunately, now, after yesterday’s announcement, I have to return to my community and explain to Arnaldo that this government, actually, unexpectedly, stopped the Basic Income Pilot, announced social assistance cuts ending the Basic Income Pilot.

Yes, they had promised in the campaign to see it through. No. That was a promise. I don’t know why the government members right now are not chanting and seal-clapping at this promise, but they promised to see the income pilot through to its end. It was a promise made. Oh, no instinct there to clap and—okay. But I guess they only keep their promises to some of the people.

With the Basic Income Pilot, was it yielding evidence that people cannot actually continue to live in forced poverty? I know that the press wanted to know at their announcement yesterday about the results of the ongoing pilot that they prematurely stopped. They danced around it and taxpayer-paid ministry staff apparently clapped them out of the room. This is what we have now, when we want answers, when we want better for more people. So the current government is a government for their people. People who need help don’t seem to be their people. People who live in poverty don’t seem to be their people.

Another part of this motion said that they have a mandate to pursue policies that put more money in people’s pockets—not the pockets of those who were a part of the Basic Income Pilot, not those who are living without dignity, forced to live in poverty on social assistance, not those people. And Ford’s pledge to cancel the minimum wage increase? Well, that’s not more money for low-income earners, not for their pockets.

Another part of this motion is that they had a mandate to create and protect jobs. President Trump’s threat to impose tariffs on the automotive sector and auto parts import sector would be devastating to Ontario’s auto sector. I’ve asked a question in the Legislature. This is something we have been talking about. Ontario has no strategic plan for an industry that accounts for one fifth, or 20%, of our GDP. We do need a strategy.

The Minister of Economic Development, Job Creation and Trade went to Washington. We want to know what he demanded. We want to know: What did this government fight for? In what way did this government stand up for auto? Reassurances aren’t going to cut it. We want to know what was accomplished.

A week or two ago, Premier Ford fired Ontario’s trade representative in Washington. Okay. That’s their right, to reassign or re-evaluate, but what’s the plan now? Do we have a new representative? Is there anyone there on our behalf? We know—and this government seems to take exception, which I see as a good sign, that they would take exception to what I’m going to say now—that Conservatives in the past have said that they would be content to see Ontario’s auto sector die. But there wasn’t a single mention of auto manufacturing from the Conservatives in the run-up to the election.

The PC Party promised to kill the Jobs and Prosperity Fund, which invests millions of dollars across the sector.

That is what we do know.

Now, when I asked the Minister of Economic Development, Job Creation and Trade about this, he did say, “I know the NDP have asked this of the former government on many occasions, so I have directed the department to begin work on a comprehensive auto strategy.” Great. I’m looking forward to that. I have every faith that if we have a comprehensive automotive strategy, that would be a very good thing for Ontario. So we will wait, we will watch and we will cross our fingers.

One other thing that I will flag for the government: Yesterday, I introduced what is now Bill 12 to re-introduce my Fairness for the Auto Sector Act. If they’re going to stand up for automotive, perhaps they would like to take a look at that and ensure that all workers in Ontario have the same entitlements. Auto workers deserve the same access to leave and entitlements as every other worker as provided by the Employment Standards Act. What is fair for all should be true for all, not all minus auto workers. I do hope that the government supports my bill and recognizes that auto workers deserve equal leave and entitlements.

Again, as I was saying, the current government is a government for their people. People who work in the automotive sector don’t seem to be their people. It remains to be seen.

Another part of their motion was that they have a mandate to address the hydro crisis. Speaker, in my riding I had collected hydro bills from constituents. I had invited them to drop off their hydro bills, and I sent them across and put them on the desk of the then Premier. It became clear during that exercise that people across my community and, I know, across all of our communities are very upset about the rising hydro costs. Interestingly, the PCs had started privatization under Harris, and that resulted in astronomical rate increases that varied wildly depending on where you lived.

The Liberals’ fair hydro plan has done so much damage, and damage heading forward to the next generation, and this government is continuing with it and unfortunately not bringing hydro back into public hands.

I’m going to read something: “Ontario’s Deficit Is Growing—and the Fair Hydro Plan Is Largely to Blame.” This is from December 2017, but the part that I wanted to share is a reminder about just how detrimental this fair hydro plan that this government is continuing with is, and how challenged we’re going to be because of it.

The Financial Accountability Office says that the province will add $75 billion to its debt over the next four years. “By 2021-22, the FAO expects the deficit to reach $9.8 billion, because the province will no longer be able to rely on one-time revenues” such as the sale of Hydro One. But the biggest piece of the puzzle is the fair hydro plan.

The Progressive Conservatives were eager to jump on the FAO’s report: “‘It’s distressing to hear another story like this that shows that the Liberals aren’t being honest with the people of Ontario about the province’s fiscal realities,’ said Todd Smith, the PC energy critic”—hey, I know that guy.

It continues: “The government announced its fair hydro plan, a subsidy that was not included in government accounting, because funding for the rate cut is being borrowed through Ontario Power Generation....

“The AG said at the time of her report’s release that the move will cost taxpayers an extra $4 billion in interest on the debt over the course of the program....

“The FAO expects that the fair hydro plan will increase program spending by an average of $2.8 billion per year.”

This team is okay with that. They are continuing with that fair hydro plan, which is a challenge. So, I would say, the current government is a government for their people. People who are worried about hydro debt for their children don’t seem to be their people.

Also, part of their motion says that they have a mandate to reduce hospital wait times. The Premier’s mental health funding cut of $330 million annually isn’t going to help reduce hospital wait times. I’m happy to read from this article: “Tories Blasted for $335-Million Cut in Planned Spending on Mental Health.”

“Health Minister Christine Elliott is under fire for cutting $335 million from planned mental health funding in Ontario this year....

“But that means a planned $525-million annual injection in new funding has been reduced to $190 million.” It begs the question: Why is the premier cutting new funding for mental health by $330 million a year?

This is not going to help reduce hospital wait times. People struggling with mental health cannot get help. There isn’t enough help across our communities. We don’t have the services. We aren’t prioritizing mental health care. Cutting mental health funding is wrong.

Interjections.

Ms. Jennifer K. French: The enthusiastic member from King–Vaughan can think that cutting mental health funding is the right thing to do, is the right path. I’m not sure why the enthusiastic heckling. The only paths that exist for people struggling with the mental health crisis right now are jail or the hospital, and our police are inter-facing with crisis every day. What are their options? De-escalation? Absolutely, of course. But then what happens?

People in crisis may or may not be capable of de-escalation, because that is the nature of mental health crises. Those individuals end up in jail or in the hospitals. If they end up in jail, they’re the responsibility, then, of our correctional workers, our correctional officers and nurses who don’t have the tools or resources to provide the support that those struggling with mental health issues require. Again, how does this reduce hospital wait times? The current government is a government for their people. People who are struggling with mental health unfortunately don’t seem to be their people.

Also part of the motion is that they have a mandate to restore accountability and trust in government. We’ve been talking at length in this House about this government changing the rules mid-game, their vendetta against city council, the Premier’s fixation with Toronto, and attacking democracy and rigging a municipal election without consultation, and manipulating regional chair elections.

A reminder: What we say in this Legislature, we are supposed to stand by. But the now-Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, back in 2012, said, “It speaks to the very core of our democracy.” I’m sorry; this was on the Municipal Amendment Act, regarding the election of chair of York region.

“I know the experience they’ve had in their regions, and I know that the politicians in Durham are very excited about this, and about their opportunity as well....

“The folks in York region ... have looked at this as a very positive change, so I hope that members will support this legislation. And perhaps we can expand it at some point down the road for all regions in the province of Ontario.” My, how things change.

If we’re going to talk about accountability and trust in government, I seem to remember, leading up to the election, that there were—and I don’t remember what the number landed at—29 individuals being investigated for the 407 data breach scandal, or whatever that is that’s brewing. That is ongoing. That does not help folks have trust in government, when that is looming, when that is hovering; sort of this stench of fraud that is hovering.

This is a government that did not have a mandate to cut social assistance rates, and that actually campaigned—while they campaigned—that they were going to see that Basic Income Pilot all the way through: “Just kidding. Promise made—no, shh. Start the car.” What?

The other thing is, no consultation when it comes to city hall and Toronto, but promised consultations when it comes to the health and physical education curriculum and the growth and development or sex ed expectations—to call it a curriculum is interesting; it’s a few expectations. But that seems to be steered by extremists and people who seem to want to take us back in time when it comes to health, well-being and sexual health and safety.

This is a government that didn’t have a platform leading into the election. This is a government that has been focusing on the feds when it comes to immigration, and trying desperately to wiggle their way out of their legal provincial responsibilities to newcomers and people seeking refuge and asylum—their provincial responsibilities. Whether they want them or not doesn’t mean that they don’t have them.

They’ve been celebrating legislating workers back to work, signalling once again to employers that they don’t have to bargain in good faith because this government will give them a sneaky way out of having to negotiate with their employees for improved working and, in this case, learning conditions. That is a shame. That is not something to celebrate. Undermining collective bargaining is problematic.

When it comes to the wind farms and some of the legislation we’ve already seen, this government has found an escape hatch to slip out of its own contracts, which signals to businesses that while this government says they are open for business it actually means that businesses had better be wary, because entering into a contract with this government will leave businesses open.

In

summary, this is quite a motion. I have a few friendly amendments to offer: That, in the opinion of this House, the current government is a government for the people who aren’t doing their best to survive on social assistance; for the people—

Interjections.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Order, please.

Look, things are going along pretty good. I also want to remind everyone in the Legislature that if there is going to be some of what I call chirping, one must be in their own seat to do so. Surprise, surprise, but that’s the way we conduct business here in the Legislature.

We will return back to the member from Oshawa and restart the clock again.

Ms. Jennifer K. French: Thank you, Speaker. Again, in

summary, as we’ve been debating this motion, I have a few friendly amendments to add:

That, in the opinion of this House, the current government is a government for the people who aren’t doing their best to survive on social assistance; for the people who don’t have disabilities; for the people who don’t live in poverty; for the people who don’t live in the margins; for the people who don’t cost money; who don’t earn minimum wage; who don’t work in the automotive sector; who don’t mind if hydro debt is passed on to their children; for people who don’t struggle with mental health and addictions; who don’t believe children should learn about consent, healthy relationships, family diversity, healthy bodies, LGBTQ issues or online safety; for the people who do not come to Canada or Ontario seeking refuge or asylum; who do not belong to a union or have bargained collective agreements; and for the people who do not expect this government to honour its contracts.

In short, the current government is a government for their people.

I would ask the actual people of Ontario who are watching the shenanigans of this Premier and government whether or not they are indeed the right sort of people—if they are indeed the very few people that this government purports to represent.

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

Ms. Donna Skelly: It’s really an honour to be standing up in the Legislature speaking at length for the very, very first time. This morning I am delivering my maiden address.

I represent residents in the spectacular riding of Flamborough–Glanbrook.

Interjection.

Ms. Donna Skelly: It is. It’s a terrific riding, a unique riding that includes both urban and rural components. It’s a vibrant, diverse riding, with a vibrant and diverse economy. The agriculture sector in Flamborough–Glanbrook contributes almost $2 billion annually to Hamilton’s local economy. We have one of Ontario’s busiest cargo air-ports. We have strong industrial parts and a booming residential sector. People from right across the GTHA have discovered the beauty of my riding and are flooding to our riding to build a home and to raise their families.

Flamborough–Glanbrook is also home to Flamboro Downs, and hundreds and hundreds of people who make a living in the horse race industry—or at least they used to make a living in the horse race industry. Perhaps one of the ugliest outcomes of the past 15 years of Liberal waste and mismanagement is the devastation that has been levelled on the horse race industry.

The previous Liberal government cancelled the Slots at Racetracks Program, and they knew it would cost 23,000 jobs and result in the death of 27,000 horses. That move has devastated the industry, an industry made up of hard-working men and women. Training centres have shuttered and family farms have been sold, all because of this decision. Shame.

Flamborough–Glanbrook is a massive riding that stretches from Niagara to Burlington, from Cambridge to the southern part of Hamilton Mountain. It includes many, many interesting historic communities, such as Stoney Creek, a community first inhabited by First Nations people and later explored by French-Canadian fur traders before being settled by Loyalists fleeing the American Revolution in the late 1700s. Binbrook is a community with a rich history of agriculture dating back to 1791. Rockton is home to the famous Rockton World’s Fair.

The fair, which is hosted every Thanks-giving weekend, has been going on for 166 years. Lynden is the birthplace of David Forsyth, who many of you probably haven’t heard of. He is celebrated as the father of Canadian soccer and formed the Western Football—or soccer—Association in Berlin, Ontario, back in 1880. It is considered one of the oldest soccer associations in the world. The historic village of Waterdown comes alive every summer with the ever-expanding ArtsFest. It’s a music festival. Carlisle, Greensville, Mount Hope and Troy are just a few of the charming towns and villages that form my riding.

I treasure all that Flamborough–Glanbrook has to offer, but more importantly, I appreciate its people, the men and women who put their trust in me to represent their interests at Queen’s Park.

As I was canvassing during the campaign, voters were telling me about their frustrations with the economy. They are worried about job security. They are worried about whether their children will find a well-paying job. They are angry about hydro bills that cost as much, in many cases, as a monthly car payment. They were concerned about how much more a carbon tax would add to their expenses. They are furious about the years of wasteful spending by the previous government. Many of the people I spoke to at the door told me that, for them, times are sometimes pretty tough. They’re struggling to pay their bills.

I was born in Sudbury, Ontario. I grew up in the nearby town of Capreol, which is part of the Nickel Belt. I was raised in a blue-collar family and, like many of my neighbours, money was tight. Every summer, my mother would take me, my brother, Doug, and my sister, Sharon, to the little bush outside the little community to pick blueberries. We filled containers as fast as our fingers could pick them—cups and baskets. There were two things we had to be careful of when we picked berries. One was eating them, because, believe me, when you start picking a blueberry and you—you just never finish filling the basket. The other, of course, was bears. We often ran into bears.

Capreol was a railroad town, and that gave us a captive market for the berries. Every day, after picking them, we would clean them and then head down to the train station and sell them to the passengers who were heading either to Toronto or out west to Vancouver. It was my very first job, and I was probably about seven years old.

I had amazing role models in my life. Two of the most influential were women.

My mother taught me humility and the value of hard work. At the age of 37, I watched her swallow her pride as she walked into our local high school and to sit in a classroom with children the same age as her oldest daughter. She wanted to get her high school diploma, and she did. Her efforts were the catalyst for the very first adult education program launched in our town.

It wasn’t easy. She was often teased. But the kids who teased her later showed up at our house and asked her to help them, and she did. She ended up teaching them in later years, and she ended up becoming an executive assistant to senior managers at hospitals and private corporations.

I didn’t know it at the time, but my grandmother was really the very first feminist in my life. She was this tiny, little soul who raised 10 children, including my mother.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): Thank you very much. It is now 10:15.

To the member from Flamborough–Glanbrook: You will have an opportunity when we resume again to finish your debate and your speech.

Debate deemed adjourned.

The Deputy Speaker (Mr. Rick Nicholls): It is now 10:15. This House stands recessed until 10:30.

The House recessed from 1015 to 1030.

Introduction of Visitors

Mr. Faisal Hassan: I would like to welcome to Queen’s Park our page Eric’s parents, Janet Churchill and Dirk Albishausen, and their friends, April Stevens and her son Julian Wells. Welcome.

Mr. Amarjot Sandhu: I’d like to introduce my good friend and one of the key members in my campaign team, Connor Byrne. Welcome to the Legislature.

M me Nathalie Des Rosiers: J’aimerais accueillir à Queen’s Park Lauren Callighen. She’s visiting for question period today. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mr. Robert Bailey: I’d like to introduce two guests and colleagues of mine: my son, Rodney Bailey, here from Sarnia–Lambton; and accompanying him, Andrew Esser from the riding of Sarnia–Lambton as well.

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: I want to introduce some of my constituents who are here visiting today: Dr. Amritpal Saini from the Innisfil Veterinary Hospital; Parvin Saini; and Bilawal Saini. Thank you very much for coming today.

Mr. David Piccini: I’d like to introduce two friends of mine from Port Hope, Darren Strongman and Debi Strongman, who are visiting. Darren just set me up this past weekend—he’s our deputy police chief in Port Hope. I know we all appreciate their service. He set me up with a great ride-along. I thoroughly enjoyed that and would recommend it for everyone else.

Hon. Victor Fedeli: I have a guest from my home riding of Nipissing here: my very good friend and returning guest Ishmael Van Der Rassel.

Decorum in chamber

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Before I ask for oral questions, I wish to address the House.

Standing order 13 confers upon the Speaker the responsibility to preserve order and decorum and to regulate debate in the interests of the House, accom-plishing its work in a civil manner.

As Speaker, I am but one of 124 members, and you elected me to this role. The Speaker needs every member’s assistance. Each of you is as much a part of the Chair as the Speaker is a part of the membership of the House. This is our House, all of us together, and we must accept the responsibility to do our work here in a manner that respects not only the traditions and customs of this place and the rules of the assembly, but also each other, as well as the democratic election that sent each of us here.

I ask you once again: Always address your remarks to the Chair, not to another member directly. Refer to other members in the third person, always using only the name of their electoral district or their parliamentary title.

Temperance of language is the hallmark of effective debate, and I know that members wish to see that as much as I do.

I would add, of course, that the Speaker has the power to name members. I’ve been reluctant to do that, because that means that the member who has been named effectively loses their voice in the House for the day, and their constituents are thus silenced for the day in terms of parliamentary debate. However, I will name members if need be, based on if their behaviour becomes unacceptable, but I will first issue a warning—one warning. If you’ve been warned, if I have to speak to you again, be assured: You will be named.

I hope that’s clear.

Oral Questions

Municipal government

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Speaker, my first question is to the Acting Premier. Why, throughout the entire election campaign, did the Premier not once talk about his plan to rip up Toronto’s wards, cancel regional elections and take power away from millions of voters?

Hon. Christine Elliott: To the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

Hon. Steve Clark: Speaker, through you to the Leader of the Opposition: I think our government for the people was very clear during the election that resulted in us becoming the government of Ontario. We made it very clear and our Premier made it very clear that we were going to respect taxpayers’ dollars, that we were going to work to reduce the size and the cost of government.

We believe very strongly that our Better Local Government Act will provide that for the citizens of Toronto by streamlining their council, by having 25 members of council. We believe that having them use the same jurisdictions their federal MPs and their provincial MPPs use is good.

I believe that a streamlined government will make quicker decisions, and those 25 members will be able to focus on the priorities for the citizens of Toronto. I believe that it is good public policy.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Ms. Andrea Horwath: The people of Ontario care about their local democracy. They care about their local democracy. Long-time Conservative voters care about their local democracy. They’re passionate about defending the autonomy and independence of Ontario’s municipalities.

Respect for the rights of voters is something that unites Ontarians across political stripes and across our vast geography. So why is the Premier showing so much disrespect for people who want to have a say in how their city is run?

Hon. Steve Clark: Again, Speaker, through you to the Leader of the Opposition: I believe our party was very clear. Our Premier was crystal clear during the election that we were not only going to respect taxpayers’ dollars, but we would always try to look to see how we can be more efficient and how local government can provide more effective programming to their citizens.

This is exactly the core of the bill that is on the order paper in my name. We believe very strongly that a council of 25 will be able to provide those streamlined, quick decisions that will be able to deal with the priorities of the citizens of Toronto. There will be no more gridlock on council after that bill is passed.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Every Canadian cares deeply about our democracy—every Canadian. No matter what our differences, all Ontarians believe that people should decide how they are governed.

That’s why this Premier’s behaviour is so shocking. By bullying his way into municipal elections, ripping up Toronto’s wards and cancelling regional chair elections, he is showing zero respect for Ontarians.

Why is this Premier abusing the powers of his office to deny voters the respect that they deserve?

Hon. Steve Clark: Again, Speaker, through you to the Leader of the Opposition: This proposed bill will make Toronto council more efficient and, as a result, will save them, over the course of the four-year term, $25 million. Again, it speaks to what we talked about during the campaign, the fact that we want smaller government and we want to be able to respect taxpayers’ dollars.

I disagree fundamentally with the conversation about democracy. I want to remind the Leader of the Opposition that as of 8 a.m., the Toronto Star reader poll shows that 69% of people who responded say that our proposal will save money and will be good for democracy—

Interjections.

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

Restart the clock. Next question.

Municipal government

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My next question is also for the Acting Premier—but of course, it’s not about the numbers, it’s about how you get to change. Democracy demands that people are involved in the change, Speaker. That’s the problem.

The Premier of this incredible province should be supporting and cultivating local democracy. He should be doing everything he can to encourage new and diverse voices to come to the table and shape the future of all of our communities. But instead of doing the right thing, this Premier is undermining our democracy. He’s trying to interfere in Toronto’s election so he can control the city from the Premier’s office.

Why is the Premier taking the power out of the hands of the people and putting more power in his own hands?

Hon. Christine Elliott: To the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

Hon. Steve Clark: I want to thank the Leader of the Opposition for the question.

Our government is committed to putting accountability and trust back into government. It should come as no surprise to Ontarians that we talked over and over in the campaign about reducing the size and cost of government, about making government—no matter what level, whether it be our level or local government—more efficient and more effective.

We believe, on this side of the House, that our member municipalities provide vital services to their constituents—very, very important services for their constituents. I believe that it’s in all of our interests to ensure that they do it in a way that’s the most efficient and respects the taxpayer.

Again, I believe that the components of our bill that are before the House, if it’s passed, will make sure we have better local government. I again ask that the Leader of the Opposition consider changing her tack and supporting our—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Ms. Andrea Horwath: I would suggest that the minister not hold his breath, Speaker, because I believe in protecting and upholding democratic processes.

To that end, running an entire election campaign with a hidden agenda is fundamentally at odds with our democracy; cancelling elections is at odds with who we are as Ontarians; and ripping up Toronto’s wards after years of public consultation is nothing more than the petty act of a man taking revenge on people who he disagrees with. It is not the behaviour of a Premier; it is the behaviour of a bully.

Why is the Premier imposing his own hidden agenda on the people of Ontario and refusing to act like a leader?

Hon. Steve Clark: Again, Speaker, through you to the Leader of the Opposition: An oversized council makes it almost impossible to make those streamlined decisions that are in Torontonians’ best interests. We believe that the only way to provide that meaningful consensus is to have a situation where in this city, you would have 25 federal MPs representing constituencies—the same constituencies that have 25 MPPs presently—and now the bill would have those same 25 city councillors in those same constituencies.

Having a streamlined council that on October 22 can make those quick decisions, can fulfill those priorities of the citizens of this city—I think that is the way to go. It should, again, come as no surprise. We talked over and over and over again, Speaker, about making sure that taxpayers’ dollars are respected. Again, smaller—

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

Final supplementary.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Look, the Premier’s assault on local democracy won’t help anyone but the Premier, and it will make it harder for the citizens of Toronto to get the services and supports that they need.

This plot is all about the Premier taking revenge on his opponents. It’s all about the Premier controlling city council from the Premier’s office. As Councillor Mammoliti said, it’s all about purging progressives off council and helping right-wingers take control of Toronto.

Why is the Premier hiding behind bluster and distraction when he should have the courage to tell the people exactly what it is that he’s up to?

Hon. Steve Clark: Again, Speaker, I want to thank the Leader of the Opposition for the question.

Our proposed legislation will not only solve a problem with the municipal government, the fact that they’re so tied up in gridlock in their decision-making process; it’s also, as I’ve said in this House before, the issue of voter parity.

The member opposite wants to quote a councillor; I’ll quote one as well. Councillor Justin Di Ciano had some excellent remarks on the subject on Friday at a press conference where he said, “The ridings do not belong to the councillors; they belong to Torontonians. There is a massive improvement—over a million Torontonians who will now have a fairer vote because of the decision made this morning.” That’s his quote.

Again, Speaker, through you to the Leader of the Opposition, there are many councillors. There is a large constituency out there that believes that having a smaller, more—

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

Interjections.

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

Social assistance

Ms. Andrea Horwath: The next question is for the Minister of Children, Community and Social Services. For 20 years, people across Ontario have been fighting to fix the damage that the last Conservative government did to social assistance. Now, instead of fixing the problems and helping everyone live with dignity, this minister is making the problems even worse. The Conservatives are slashing the planned social assistance increase by half and denying people the raises that they were promised. Why is this minister cutting social assistance in a callous attempt to save money on the backs of the most vulnerable?

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: I thank the leader of the official opposition for her question. I disagree with the premise. We have been very clear. We have inherited a patchwork system that is dysfunctional, that is in a mess.

What we have said is that we are going to have a 1.5% increase in social assistance rates, in ODSP and Ontario Works across the board, as we hit pause on the irresponsible plan put forward by the previous Liberal government. What we have said is that we will have action in 100 days, so we can lift more people up, get them back into the workforce where that’s possible and provide them with the necessary support they so desperately need. We will lead this process with compassion, and we will ensure that we have better outcomes for the people who we represent across all of Ontario.

I look forward to your supplementary question, so I can talk a little bit more about our plan.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Well, Speaker, by slashing social assistance increases and cancelling the Basic Income Pilot, the minister is punishing people and pushing them into deeper poverty. The Income Security Advocacy Centre says that the Premier’s cut will steal $150 million out of the hands of the poorest people in our province. They say there is absolutely nothing compassionate about what this minister is doing, and I completely agree with income security advocates across Ontario who are appalled and incredibly disappointed.

How can this minister stand here and do the dirty work of a Premier who’s attacking the most vulnerable people in Ontario?

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: The leader of the official opposition would rather us continue to pile onto a very broken system that is disadvantaging many people. She and I spent many years in the opposition together, and many questions and many committees with the Auditor General.

But let me be very clear: I had a good meeting on Sunday and an even better one on Monday with the Auditor General. The Auditor General told me that Ontario Works and Ontario disability supports have lots of challenges. In fact, the previous administration refused to implement some of those recommendations that would have improved the system for better outcomes for people.

We’re going to act expeditiously. I’ve given my ministry 100 days as we hit the pause button and, under compassionate grounds, have asked and received from cabinet a 1.5% increase for all those folks on social assistance. We’re going to get more people back on track. We’re going to lift them up, and we’re going to start with compassion.

But I really reject the dog whistle politics that continue—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Thank you. Stop the clock. I would ask the Minister of Children, Community and Social Services to withdraw the unparliamentary remark.

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: Sorry, Speaker. I withdraw.

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

Anti-racism activities

Mr. Kaleed Rasheed: My question is for the Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services. Yesterday, I was deeply disappointed by the actions of one of the members of the official opposition in this House. Mr. Speaker, our government for the people includes members from diverse races, faiths and back-grounds.

The government has chosen to honour the people of Ontario by continuing House proceedings today. I’m proud to stand here today and state that our government for the people will not tolerate hate or racism of any kind, and it has no place within this Legislature.

As the minister responsible for the Anti-Racism Directorate, could the minister please explain the position of this government on hate and racism in Ontario?

Hon. Michael A. Tibollo: Thank you to the member from Mississauga East–Cooksville for the important question that he just gave me. I’d also like to congratulate the member on his election to the Legislature.

As the member stated, our government is for the people and it includes every person in this great province. I was absolutely shocked and disgusted by the comments made by the member of the official opposition in this Legislature during yesterday’s question period. Ontario is an inclusive province, where all are respected no matter their background, nationality, faith or race.

As a second-generation Canadian—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m going to ask the member to withdraw the charge that he made.

Hon. Michael A. Tibollo: Withdraw.

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

Hon. Michael A. Tibollo: Withdraw, yes.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Withdrawn.

Supplementary?

Mr. Kaleed Rasheed: Through you, Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister for his response to this important topic. I feel proud knowing that our government for the people is taking the initiative to combat hate and racism within this province and to know that this government is committed to taking hate and racism seriously. It is without question that our government for the people will not tolerate hate and will be sure to remain committed to our priorities of listening and serving all of the great people of this province.

Mr. Speaker, given the extremely inappropriate remarks made yesterday by a member of this Legislature—

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

Mr. Kaleed Rasheed: Withdraw.

Could the minister please explain how he’s combating racism and hate within this great province?

Interjections.

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

Start the clock. Minister?

Hon. Michael A. Tibollo: Again, I want to thank the member for this important question. I want to ensure all members of this House that my ministry is responsible for overseeing the Anti-Racism Directorate. It’s continuing to fulfill its mandate and it’s working on the basis of a whole-of-government approach to addressing systemic racism.

Anti-racism is a proactive process of removing systemic barriers that seek to identify, remedy and prevent racial inequities. It is an investment in human capital and the province’s economic future. Our goal is to ensure opportunities are available to everyone, creating a healthier society and a stronger economy—a better Ontario for all.

Again, Mr. Speaker, there is simply no place for hate in Ontario or within the walls of this Legislature. Our government for the people will continue taking this important issue seriously.

Social assistance

Mrs. Lisa Gretzky: My question is to the Minister of Children, Community and Social Services. Yesterday the Conservative government announced that they were slashing already-meagre social assistance rates for people living in poverty and those with disabilities. This mean-spirited and callous decision unfairly targets the most vulnerable members of our communities. It lacks compassion, empathy and shows a complete disdain for people living in poverty.

We know there are problems with the system and how it functions, but it should be obvious to everyone that slashing rate increases in half is simply not how you help vulnerable people.

Speaker, does the minister really believe that people receiving social assistance will be better off with a cut to their already-below-poverty-level income?

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: Thank you to the member for the question. I will note that we are actually moving forward with a 1.5% increase across the board for ODSP and Ontario Works. We have made that decision on compassionate grounds as we hit the pause button on a previous plan put forward by the Liberal government, which was unsustainable. It was a mess. It was dis-jointed. It was a patchwork. We could have cherry-picked certain things, but I think that would have been irresponsible, because we would have been building on top of an already broken system.

What we have said is that we are going to set our-selves up for success by putting forward a plan in the next 100 days, and we will come back to the people of Ontario with a plan that will lift people up, that will bring dignity back to the system, that will ensure that people can get back to work where they can and, where they can’t, that they have a strong, sustainable social safety net for themselves.

I look forward to the supplemental.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Mrs. Lisa Gretzky: Back to the minister: The minister said yesterday that they need 100 days to figure out this system and set it right, but the studies have been done and the results are already in. Over a year’s worth of work went into producing the Income Security: A Roadmap for Change report, which was submitted to the government last fall. In it, the working groups laid out substantial recommendations for Ontario’s income security system, including a rate increase of 5% a year. Speaker, I have a copy of the report. I’m happy to send it to the minister so she can familiarize herself with it.

Will the minister call off her redundant 100-day fishing expedition and accept the results of the Roadmap for Change?

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: The short answer, obviously, is no. It wasn’t working. The system wasn’t working under the previous Liberal administration. It was dysfunctional. It’s a mess.

The first days I was the minister responsible, I had massive briefings, because I inherited five ministries. Did you know, Speaker, that social assistance, poverty reduction and other ways to help people were spread over a number of different ministries, rather than being repatriated into one area? As a result, the Basic Income Pilot project people weren’t speaking with the poverty reduction people, who weren’t speaking with the social assistance people.

I think I owe it to Ontarians and this government owes it to Ontarians to make sure that we’re speaking to every-body within these various departments to put forward a sustainable plan to help people get back on track, and that’s what we’re going to do in the next 100 days.

Interjections.

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

Social assistance

Mrs. Nina Tangri: My question is for the Minister of Children, Community and Social Services, with responsibility for immigration and women’s issues. Minister, as I listened to your announcement from yesterday after-noon and reviewed your news release to learn more about the Ontario social safety net, our social assistance programs and in particular Ontario Works and the Ontario Disability Support Program, I was dismayed by the current situation with real growth in the number of longer-term recipients and the fact that the growth in the social assistance caseload has been greater than the rate of population growth over the last 15 years.

I was also quite disappointed to hear that there is real growth in the number of people who are on Ontario Works for more than five years. I had believed that Ontario Works is a short-term, helping-hand program. How can this be true if recipients are on the program for more than five years?

I have also come to learn that of those who get themselves off the program—

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

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: I thank the honourable member for her question. As I indicated, one of the first things that I did when I became the new minister responsible for social services was to review the social assistance program that our government inherited, and this is what we found—and I must be clear: This is not a fun job. This is a tough job, but we need to make sure that we have the right outcomes for people.

I’m just going to read to you a few things. One in five people stay on Ontario Works for more than five years. That’s not fair to the people who would really prefer to have a job, which is the best social program. The number of single people using the program grew by 57% in the last 15 years. There’s a cycle of poverty that we have to get people out of in this province. That’s the right thing to do. When people leave the program, almost half of them return, 90% in the first year alone. That’s not fair to people in need, and that’s why we’re going to set a target in the next 100 days to get people back on track in this province.

Interjections.

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

Start the clock. Supplementary?

Mrs. Nina Tangri: Thank you very much, Minister, for that response. I do feel better knowing that this government is focused on solutions and that this government is focused on objectives. Certainly we should measure compassion by the outcomes and the motivation rather than measuring them in dollars and cents. I also appreciate that you have been quite forthright about the speed with which you will develop a plan for the future.

I understand from your announcement and news release that the social assistance plan that coordinates the many programs you now oversee in the new Ministry of Children, Community and Social Services is your key focus. I also understand that you would rather front-line staff spend time helping to stabilize recipients and helping recipients to see a path to success, than spending their time on paperwork.

Minister, do you feel the Liberal social assistance programs are trapping too many people in the cycle of dependence? Can you please tell this House about the plan you and your officials are working on?

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: It was actually a very important question. As somebody who grew up in a very small rural town in Nova Scotia, I saw the effects of poverty, and I saw the effects of a good job and how that brought dignity to people. That’s certainly where we want to start.

What we’re going to do with our 100-day plan is to have equal measures of head and heart. We’re going to lead with compassion and we’re going to lead with objectives to get more people back on track and help them get sorted out.

But I want to address one of the points that my colleague mentioned about the administration. My staff in the field—and I was able to go and visit many of my staff in Ottawa—are spending between 75% to 90% of their time on administration rather than setting people up with life skills and mentoring them. If we want to talk about compassion, we actually have to lead with compassion and make sure we treat people with dignity and respect and give them a path forward, not like what the previous Liberal administration did in making sure they were stuck in poverty.

Curriculum

Ms. Jill Andrew: Good morning, Mr. Speaker. My question is for the Minister of Education.

The youth of Ontario, many of whom actually went through the public education system with the outdated, out-of-touch 1998 curriculum, are demanding that the 2015 curriculum be back in classrooms, Minister. Listen to their voices. They’re calling to put a stop to this regressive and dangerous move. They won’t settle for you not answering their questions and they know—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Sorry to interrupt, but I would ask again that the members make their questions through the Chair.

Ms. Jill Andrew: —and they know this government’s mythical 2014 curriculum does not exist.

Will the minister finally listen to and respect the students of Ontario, who are telling this government that the 1998 curriculum is not enough to keep them safe from homophobia, transphobia, gender-based violence, sexual assault and appearance-based bullying in the classroom and online?

Hon. Lisa M. Thompson: First of all, I would like to say to the member opposite that I was very pleased to see her join us in Ottawa last week as she participated in the Commonwealth Women Parliamentarians conference as well as the CPA conference. I really appreciated that you were there, and you raised your voice very well. Thank you.

With regard to how we’re moving forward in the fall, I have to impress upon everyone that we’ve made our position very clear. Teachers will be using the curriculum last used in 2014. To the member opposite, I would like to say: Please work with me and ensure that the students you spoke of raise their voices and participate in the fulsome consultation that we will be hosting this fall. That is where they will have a forum to share how they feel and what they feel is important to pursue in terms of paths forward.

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

Ms. Jill Andrew: Through you, Mr. Speaker: Minister, our students need consultation. September is too late. Students will already be back in class. Teachers will be left without a curriculum framework that has any rel-evance to the world kids live in today. Parents in Toronto–St. Paul’s tell me they just cannot do this work alone. They need teachers to be equipped with the modernized 2015 curriculum.

Will this government engage with Ontario’s youth, or are they only interested in consulting with their right-wing extremist friends?

Hon. Lisa M. Thompson: I have to share with you that we’re going to be engaging with every single person who wants to be heard with regard to the path we’re going to pursue as we move forward. And until then, we are going to use the curriculum that was last used in 2014.

Speaker, I have to share with you that I can’t wait—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The opposition will come to order.

Hon. Lisa M. Thompson: —to kick off this consultation. I invite every member in this House to join me so that we have a fulsome consultation that enables every single person, be it a student, be it a parent, be it a teacher, be it a concerned community member—because we are committed to this consultation.

I have to remind everyone in this House that the premise of this is because we had a former Liberal government that totally ignored the concerns of parents. Just like the federal NDP leader said, we’re going to respect our parents and consult with them and everyone else.

Social assistance

Mr. Mike Schreiner: My question is for the Minister of Children, Community and Social Services. Conservative economist Milton Friedman was an early promoter of a basic income guarantee because he felt it was a small-government, non-bureaucratic solution to eliminate poverty. Former Conservative Senator Hugh Segal designed the basic income guarantee policy to promote fairness and to help eliminate poverty. During the last election campaign, a Conservative spokesperson said the PC government would continue the Basic Income Pilot.

I participated in a debate with the Deputy Premier. She confirmed that the pilot would continue. Yet, yesterday, the minister announced that the Basic Income Pilot would be cancelled.

Through you, Mr. Speaker, to the minister: Why did your party make a promise to keep the Basic Income Pilot during the campaign and break your promise yesterday?

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: Thank you very much to the leader of the Green Party. It’s a pleasure to take a question from you and welcome your historic win here in the House. This is my first opportunity to say that.

Look, this ministry is about making some tough decisions because we’ve been left with some very difficult challenges. Immediately after being selected as the minister responsible, I looked at the research project as a model and I was informed by many in my ministry that this kind of program really does not support people becoming independent contributors to the economy, to their families and to the community. We need a system that is not only cost-effective—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order. The official opposition will come to order.

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: —but incentivizes people to get back to work. When it incentivizes them, we need to make sure that they are not penalized for income inequality.

We would rather, right now, invest in building a system of social services that is more affordable for the province, but also more successful for those who require support.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Mr. Mike Schreiner: Through you, Mr. Speaker, to the minister: Thank you for the kind words welcoming me to the Legislature—

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: And to my office.

Mr. Mike Schreiner: And into your old office, absolutely.

Mr. Speaker, I agree that Ontario’s social assistance system is broken. This is exactly why we need a basic income guarantee pilot to study how to fix the system. Numerous economists from across the political spectrum—left, right, centre—have all agreed that a Basic Income Pilot is an effective way to create a small-government solution to solving poverty.

So through you, Mr. Speaker, to the minister: Can you provide an economic analysis detailing why the ministry decided that the Basic Income Pilot was not effective and share that with members of the Legislature?

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: I thank the honourable member for his question.

Look, our government will be doing a line-by-line audit that will be made available in due course. But let’s get back to the point. We, in the early days of this government, found that we had a patchwork, dysfunctional system to eradicate poverty in Ontario, which social assistance and basic income should be part of. So we made a tough decision, a decision that is going to be right for the people, but it was a difficult decision to make.

Over the next hundred days, we are going to develop an affordable, responsible plan to help people who are on the Basic Income Pilot project to get back to work, to get back to school, to find themselves an opportunity to lift themselves up out of the cycle of poverty that we’ve seen over the past 15 years.

I would point out, as somebody who has raised tens of thousands of pounds of food for food cupboards in my home community, that there’s a greater reliance today of people using food banks, and there’s a greater reliance of people needing affordable housing and there’s a greater reliance of people who need homeless shelters, and that’s a result of 15 years of mismanagement.

Taxation

Mr. David Piccini: Good morning, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks.

During the election, Ontario families spoke out against cap-and-trade, Ontario businesses spoke out against cap-and-trade and this government listened. The former Liberal government made Ontario closed for business with this punitive tax and many other measures.

However, last week, the minister introduced Bill 4,

an act to wind down the cap-and-trade program. Our approach is different, Mr. Speaker. Our approach is an approach based on what is in the best interests of Ontario families and businesses. Can the Minister of the Environment let Ontario families and businesses know what kind of relief they can expect from our government?

Hon. Rod Phillips: Through you, Mr. Speaker, I thank the member from Northumberland–Peterborough South. I appreciate the question.

While the federal government continues with their plan to impose a job-killing carbon tax, we on this side of the Legislature have been clear that Ontario will proceed with a plan to cut taxes, create jobs and encourage growth. Yesterday we began debate on Bill 4, the Cap and Trade Cancellation Act, which will put an end to the carbon tax era in Ontario.

I would like to thank the members from Barrie–Innisfil and from Cambridge for standing up for their constituents and speaking in favour of the bill—I see her seating has improved, no doubt as a result of her speech. They understand that the legislation will make life more affordable for all Ontarians.

This legislation includes a real commitment to a made-in-Ontario environmental plan that will tackle climate change but not through a regressive, job-killing tax. Furthermore, we will create 8,000 jobs through this plan and save Ontario families $260 each and every year.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Mr. David Piccini: I thank the honourable minister for his answer. Thank you for listening to the people, Minister. Promise made—

Interjections: —promise kept.

Mr. David Piccini: I know that after years of un-kept promises, years of false promises, it truly offends the sensibilities of the members opposite to see this government delivering not on their agenda but on our agenda.

We’re going to stay true to our promises, Mr. Speaker, because we know—

Interjection.

Mr. David Piccini: You’ll have your turn.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Leader of the Opposition will please come to order.

Mr. David Piccini: We know that if the opposition had their way, we would increase gas prices by 35 cents a litre, crippling small families in Ontario.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Speaker, that is not true.

Mr. David Piccini: Their member said that lowering gas prices was reckless, Mr. Speaker—was reckless.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I ask the member for Niagara Falls to withdraw.

Mr. Wayne Gates: I withdraw.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: I withdraw, Speaker.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Leader of the Opposition, you have to stand up and withdraw.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: I withdraw, Speaker.

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

We have a few more seconds. Please put your question.

Mr. David Piccini: [ inaudible ], Speaker. Can the minister let us know how this government will make Ontario competitive, while recognizing the challenges of climate change?

Interjections.

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

Mr. Gilles Bisson: Point of order.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I will hear your point of order after question period.

Minister, response?

Hon. Rod Phillips: I thank the member for the question. It’s quite clear where this side of the Legislature stands, but with the NDP, you just never know. Yesterday, the NDP member from Timmins held a press conference. He was introducing what he calls the Fairness in Petroleum Products Pricing Act, advocating for stricter rules protecting consumers from higher gas prices.

Now, while this may or may not be a good idea, yesterday in this House, Mr. Speaker, NDP members stood and spoke in opposition to actually reducing gas prices by 4.5 cents a litre and 5.5 cents for diesel fuel. In contrast, we have been very clear. We have said what we will do, not empty promises.

Interjections.

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

Next question.

Municipal elections

Mr. Peter Tabuns: My question is to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Canadian democracy is built on a foundation of laws and customs. Since Confederation, Ontario has developed customs and common practices that have led to a more meaningful and robust democracy.

The vindictive actions taken by this Conservative government toward the people of Toronto violate a long-standing custom to not interfere in local government elections. The government’s actions are nothing short of an affront to our democracy.

Why has this government so wilfully violated our democratic institutions for political gain?

Hon. Steve Clark: Through you, Speaker, to the member, we’re taking decisive action so that on October 22 the people of Toronto will have a streamlined council that can make those quick decisions, but in the best interests of taxpayers. Local government, as I’ve said many times, delivers very critical services. But I have to say to the member that bigger councils are not necessarily better councils.

Again, it should come as no surprise to the member that we’re looking at having a more efficient and more effective government.

My officials are working with the staff at the city of Toronto to deal with the changing of the nomination dates included in the bill, from July 27 to September 14. I want to assure the member and this House that the elections will continue on October 22. We’re working with the city of Toronto. We’re working with—

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

It is anti-democratic to cancel elections. It is anti-democratic to alter elections while they’re in full swing. And it is anti-democratic to do all this without consulting anyone. The fact that only certain municipalities that the Premier has a personal grudge against are targeted by these anti-democratic moves is even more chilling.

Why is protecting the Premier’s ego more important than upholding democratic institutions that he is supposed to protect?

Hon. Steve Clark: Again, Speaker, through you to the member, our party and our Premier were very clear during the election. We talked every day of the campaign about respecting taxpayers’ dollars and about reducing the size and cost of government.

I want to again remind the member that a bigger council doesn’t mean it’s a better council. I believe quite strongly in having a system where you have that one electoral boundary, where you’re able to look at a constituent and say there’s one MP, there’s one MPP and there’s one city councillor.

On October 22 there will be an election in the city of Toronto. It will provide a more streamlined council that can make those quick decisions, but very important decisions. I think it’s going to be a better council. It’s going to be a better decision-making process. This bill will result in better local government.

Interjections.

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

Next question.

Taxation

Ms. Christine Hogarth: My question is for the Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks. Today the federal government has finally come to terms with the ineffectiveness of their planned carbon tax. This tax, as we have said, is detrimental to the Canadian economy and does not have the best interests of Canadian businesses in mind. If passed, the federal government’s revision of their carbon tax will reduce what Canadian businesses will have to pay by 10%.

Minister, through the Speaker: How will this revision of the federal carbon tax aid Canadian businesses and bolster the broader Canadian economy while providing relief for Ontario families?

Hon. Rod Phillips: I thank the member from Etobicoke–Lakeshore for her question.

This government was elected on a mandate to put people first and make life more affordable for families in Ontario. This includes our commitment to scrap the cap-and-trade carbon tax, which we are in the process of doing with Bill 4. Our promise was clear.

But as the member also mentioned—and this was news to all of us this morning—following a series of closed-door meetings between industry officials and the federal government, the federal government has signalled a reduction in their planned carbon tax. The fact is, this climb-down by the federal government is a signal that we have been right all along.

While I’m pleased to see that the Prime Minister has started to acknowledge the severe economic impacts of a job-killing carbon tax, I’ll continue to say, and this government will continue to say, that we oppose a carbon tax in any form and/or in any size.

If the federal government continues to pursue a carbon tax to punish Ontario families and make Ontario businesses uncompetitive, we will oppose—

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

Interjections.

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

Start the clock. Supplementary?

Ms. Christine Hogarth: Thank you very much, Minister. I’m happy to see that Justin Trudeau woke up this morning and smelled the coffee. I’m happy that he realized the negative effects of this tax on the economy, Canadian businesses and Canadian families.

The reduced tax means businesses will have fewer costs to pass along to consumers and will face less competitive pressure. Automakers are already facing difficulty in maintaining jobs and investment in Canada and cannot afford sharply higher carbon taxes.

I’m proud to say that our government is keeping our promises and moving past the previous Liberal government’s obsession with raising taxes. Instead, we’re creating opportunity to usher in a new era of economically prudent and effective environmental action that will protect Ontario families.

Minister, through the Speaker: My question is, why do you think Mr. Trudeau and the Liberals rolled back their carbon tax scheme?

Hon. Rod Phillips: Mr. Speaker, through you to the member: Clearly the federal Liberal Party and Mr. Trudeau are starting to hear the message from Ontario employers and from businesses across Canada that a carbon tax will make them less competitive.

It’s also perhaps a coincidence that an Ipsos poll released just a few weeks ago found that 72% of Canadians thought that a carbon tax was nothing more than a cash grab. That’s why we are committed to using all the tools that we have available, including all the tools in the courts, to oppose the federal government’s carbon tax.

We did not fight a campaign to eliminate cap-and-trade just to have a job-killing carbon tax imposed. The carbon-tax era in Ontario is over. Promise made, promise kept.

Social assistance

Ms. Sandy Shaw: My question is for the Minister of Children, Community and Social Services. This Premier cuts local government in half and calls it “more representation.” The Premier ends environmental protections and calls it “conservation.” This government acts cruelly and calls it “compassion.”

Mr. Speaker, I’ve heard the minister twice this morning say that they are going to be hitting the pause button. It’s quite a callous comment, because people cannot hit the pause button on their lives. In fact, I would suggest that it’s actually a rewind button, taking this province back decades.

My question, Mr. Speaker, is that given that the decision announced yesterday to end the Basic Income Pilot before any evidence is in can only be seen as punitive, why, without any evidence, is this Conservative government ending the Basic Income Pilot project?

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: I thank the honourable member for her question. I understand it will be difficult for her because her community is impacted.

First, I just want to say thanks to the people who took that leap of faith and joined the project. I know it took a lot of courage for people to do that, and I will commit that we will take a thoughtful and responsible approach as we wind down.

But let me talk a little bit about the research. I have a ministry, I have bureaucrats and I have staff that are monitoring this, and I am told that this program isn’t working. It’s actually disincentivizing people from working. It’s disincentivizing them from lifting themselves up.

I appreciate the member opposite’s question, but our project research team will continue to be in place to support participants in the study. We’ll have more to say on how we’re going to wind this program down. I also want them to know that their payments will still be on time for the month of August, and I assure them that if they have any questions, I would be happy to take them as minister responsible for this area.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary.

Ms. Sandy Shaw: Mr. Speaker, through you to the minister: One of the country’s most respected fiscal conservatives, Hugh Segal, whom I’ve had the pleasure of speaking with, recommended this particular form the pilot would take, so I presume that Mr. Segal is not in the backroom of Ford’s hard-right Conservatives.

Since this pilot started, there have been testimonials from researchers around the world. It has—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Once again, I’m going to remind the members that you refer to other individual members in the third person, and you talk about their riding name or their parliamentary name.

Ms. Sandy Shaw: I apologize, Mr. Speaker. Yes.

Let me just quote some of the participants who are from my riding of Hamilton West–Ancaster–Dundas. A woman said, “I don’t feel so backed into a corner. If I want to eat, I can afford to buy something instead of going to a food bank.” That’s from Wendy Moore.

I would also like to quote Tom Cooper, the director of the Hamilton Roundtable for Poverty Reduction, who said, “I am angry on behalf of the ... Hamiltonians who were promised they could participate in this pilot project. They were sold a bill of goods” by the Tory government.

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: Thanks very much, Speaker. Look, I will say this: The constant labelling by the opposition is not helpful to this debate. This is a very sensitive area. We had to hit the pause button because we inherited a disjointed, fragmented social assistance and poverty reduction strategy. These aren’t easy decisions, but they are the right ones for better outcomes for the future of Ontarians and in order to make sure that they are more sustainable.

I would urge the member opposite, if she would like to have a conversation with me, to sit down and we will talk about how we can best get her residents back on track as we get out of this basic income research project. But I assure the member opposite that when we take our time, in the next 100 days, to outline a plan for the people of Ontario, there will be less people going to food banks. There will be more people getting back to work and there will be more people having a sense of optimism in the province of Ontario after 15 years of reckless Liberal spending and planning.

Economic development

Mr. Billy Pang: My question is for the Minister of Infrastructure. After 15 long years of self-serving Liberal administration, the people of Ontario finally have a PC government, led by Premier Doug Ford, which is committing to bring prosperity and opportunity back to the province.

Yesterday, it was reported that Waterfront Toronto and Sidewalk Labs had entered into a plan development agreement to move forward with developing a high-tech neighbourhood with a people-first approach. That means well-paying jobs, affordable housing and urban innovation.

Can the minister please share with the House what this neighbourhood of the future will look like?

Hon. Monte McNaughton: I’d like to thank the member for Markham–Unionville for the great question here this morning.

Mr. Speaker, our government is pleased that Sidewalk Labs, an associate company of Google, has partnered with Waterfront Toronto to deliver modern, innovative infrastructure for the province of Ontario. Sidewalk Labs will be investing $50 million to help create a master innovation and development plan for Quayside which will prioritize sustainability, affordability, mobility and economic opportunities. Further innovations will include data-driven processes to ensure energy efficiency and improve noise, traffic and pollution. Other areas for development and research will include high-speed Internet, machine learning and self-driving cars.

This is cutting-edge innovation that’s going to likely lead to 5,000 new private sector jobs being created here in Toronto and in Ontario. Mr. Speaker, Ontario is open for business.

Interjections.

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

Supplementary.

Mr. Billy Pang: Back to the minister: Thank you for the great update. This development will certainly help send a signal that Ontario is open for business for all sectors and industries. Attracting a prominent company like Google to invest right here in Toronto is a sign of good things to come. I’m sure the rest of the world will be looking to Ontario to see the steps we are taking to promote innovation and sustainability in mixed-use neighbourhoods.

Can the minister tell this House how this investment fits into the broader vision of the province and what economic benefits it offers?

Hon. Monte McNaughton: Thank you to the member for the excellent follow-up question. Mr. Speaker, with great investments like this, it is no wonder that Toronto and Ontario continually rank as one of the top high-tech centres in the entire world.

The potential long-term economic benefits of moving forward with this specific development could include 5,000 new jobs, innovative solutions to urban issues, and fresh investments totalling billions and billions of dollars. It delivers on this government’s and our Premier’s commitment to attracting knowledge-based capital and investments to Ontario. We’re going to continue to create and support high-paying jobs in the private sector and innovation in new high-tech sectors. Our m