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

April 19, 2023

43rd Parliament, 1st Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

vol. A

Hansard Transcripts

vol. B

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcript 2023-Apr-19 vol. A (PDF)

L067A - Wed 19 Apr 2023 / Mer 19 avr 2023

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Wednesday 19 April 2023 Mercredi 19 avril 2023

Orders of the Day

Better Schools and Student Outcomes Act, 2023 / Loi de 2023 sur l’amélioration des écoles et du rendement des élèves

Members’ Statements

Hospice Renfrew

Black Walnut Bakery Café

Homelessness

Northern Health Travel Grant

John Brummell

March of Dimes

Innovation Arena

Health care

Housing

George Leslie Mackay

Introduction of Visitors

Question Period

Land use planning

Hospice care / Cost of living

School nutrition programs

School facilities / Refugee services

Services for seniors and persons with disabilities

Ontario Place

Tenant protection

Affordable housing

Public safety

School facilities

Agri-food industry

Long-term care

Health care post-secondary education

Health care

Women in sports / Tourism

Visitors

Introduction of Visitors

Reports by Committees

Standing Committee on the Interior

Introduction of Bills

Advocate for Older Adults Act, 2023 / Loi de 2023 sur l’intervenant en faveur des personnes âgées

Petitions

Education

School boards

Missing persons

School boards

Education

Trespass notices

Orders of the Day

Better Schools and Student Outcomes Act, 2023 / Loi de 2023 sur l’amélioration des écoles et du rendement des élèves

The House met at 0900.

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

Prayers.

Orders of the Day

Better Schools and Student Outcomes Act, 2023 / Loi de 2023 sur l’amélioration des écoles et du rendement des élèves

Resuming the debate adjourned on April 18, 2023, on the motion for second reading of Bill 98,

An Act to amend various Acts relating to education and child care / Projet de loi 98, Loi modifiant diverses lois en ce qui concerne l’éducation et la garde d’enfants.

Hon. Paul Calandra: Point of order, Mr. Speaker.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’ll recognize the government House leader on a point of order.

Hon. Paul Calandra: Speaker, if you seek it, I think you will find unanimous consent to allow the member for Ottawa West–Nepean to recommence her 60-minute lead when she resumes debate.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The government House leader is seeking the unanimous consent of the House to allow the member for Ottawa West–Nepean to recommence her 60-minute remarks on this bill. Agreed? Agreed.

Further debate? I recognize the member for Ottawa West–Nepean.

Ms. Chandra Pasma: Thank you, Speaker.

I’m very pleased to have the opportunity today to rise to speak to Bill 98, the Better Schools and Student Outcomes Act. This is another example of the government’s Orwellian naming of legislation. I think a more apt title for it would have been “the micromanaging school boards as a distraction from the underfunding of schools act,” or, as OECTA president Barb Dobrowolski recommended, “the failed Conservative government keeps on failing students act.” I’d also like to suggest “the Wizard of Oz act”—pay no attention to the minister behind the curtain.

Because what we have here is a spectacular refusal to take responsibility for the government’s failures on the education file and the many ways in which this government is shortchanging our kids. Instead, the government is trying to distract parents by blaming schools and school boards for the underinvestment. He’s desperately hoping that you don’t notice that, once again this year, education funding is not keeping up with inflation.

Instead, he wants you to believe that if he blusters enough about basic skills, you won’t even notice that there’s no actual plan here to address the real reasons why our children are struggling.

He’s hoping you won’t pay attention to rising class sizes, to the cuts to teachers and education workers, to the lack of special education supports, to the absence of mental health supports, to the rising tide of violence in our schools because of the mental health crisis, to the burnout that teachers and education workers are experiencing because of the cuts and conditions imposed on them by this government, and to the impact of e-learning on students and school budgets.

This bill and the timing of it, along with the minister’s announcement on Sunday, is smoke and mirrors. It is sleight of hand. It’s saying, “Please look over here so that you don’t notice what we’re doing over here,” so that you disbelieve the things you are seeing in schools with your own eyes.

Mrs. Robin Martin: Point of order.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member for Eglinton–Lawrence has a point of order.

Mrs. Robin Martin: I’m sorry to interrupt my friend opposite, but she’s imputing motive to the member from King–Vaughan, the Minister of Education. She’s talking about his motives in bringing forward this legislation, which I think is against the rules, under 25(i).

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The member is quite correct that the standing orders prohibit the imputing of false motives against another member, and I’ll be listening carefully to ensure that that’s not happening.

I return to the member for Ottawa West–Nepean.

Ms. Chandra Pasma: Thank you, Speaker.

Are our children struggling? Yes, absolutely. Do they need and deserve better supports? Yes, absolutely. But let’s talk about why they’re struggling and who is actually responsible and what the solutions are if you’re not a minister obsessed with avoiding responsibility.

The past three years have been rough; there is no doubt about that. I know, as a parent, speaking to my kids’ teachers at parent-teacher interviews, that they have flagged that students are behind where they should be. They can’t compare kids to previous years because kids aren’t meeting the same markers that they would normally meet. Kids definitely need support in their learning.

During the past three years, we have also had longer school closures here in Ontario than any other jurisdiction in North America because this government refused to make the investments and put in place the policies that would have kept kids safe. They refused to invest in smaller class sizes. They gave COVID tests to private schools and left publicly funded schools at the back of the line. They made ventilation upgrades but refused to set any kind of standards for ventilation or implement any kind of monitoring or reporting that would ensure that we were actually getting better air quality in schools.

They didn’t fully fund COVID measures to protect our kids and to help prevent learning loss, either. They required boards to pay for many of these measures out of their own reserves.

For instance, the Ottawa-Carleton District School Board paid $30 million out of reserves for COVID safety measures and for investments to prevent learning loss. Trustees have told me that they viewed the reserves as an emergency fund or a rainy day fund, and a global pandemic is nothing if not a violent downpour. So they spent their rainy day funds. That’s a decision I can wholeheartedly support, and yet I am left to wonder why they had to make that decision.

Why wasn’t the Ministry of Education pouring funds into COVID measures and programs to protect against learning loss, especially when the government was sitting on billions of dollars in COVID relief funds from the federal government? Why sit on that money and then force school boards to spend down reserves?

And now some of those school boards are in the position of facing deficits, again due to the minister’s underfunding of education, and the government is refusing to reimburse school boards for those COVID-related deficits.

The Ottawa-Carleton school board spent $30 million out of reserves, and now they’re facing cuts of up to $10 million to $13 million for next year.

The Toronto District School Board spent $70 million out of reserves. Now they’re facing cuts of upwards of $64 million, and the government is forcing them to make these cuts instead of refunding them for those COVID-related expenses.

This learning loss, this need for additional supports for learning among our children didn’t just happen. It’s not just the inevitable outcome of a pandemic; it is a result of policy and funding choices by this government not to invest in our kids when they needed it most. So, yes, our kids came out of the last three years struggling.

Now let’s talk about why our kids are having trouble catching up, and let’s start with class sizes. I spoke with a teacher last week who told me that he has children who are at four or five different grade levels in terms of their ability, in a single class. That one teacher has to try to provide lessons and support to all those children where they’re at so that everybody learns and everybody is challenged and no one is left behind. How are you supposed to do that when you’re in a class of 35 students?

How are you supposed to provide 35 students with four or five different skill levels the help and support they need, especially when five or six of those kids have an individual education plan or a disability and you have no EA in your class? And from the students’ perspective, how are you supposed to learn when your classroom is that cramped and noisy? I know in my riding, I’ve heard from parents of children in classrooms where they can’t even accommodate the number of desks for the number of children in their class, so kids are sitting elbow-to-elbow at tables, trying to learn.

How do those conditions set children up to succeed? Not getting enough attention in a noisy, crowded room—it would be a miracle if kids were doing well.

Let me be frank here, Speaker: Crowded classrooms are not a new problem in Ontario. They were a problem under the former Liberal government, as well.

In 2014, nine years ago, when we were picking a school for my oldest daughter, the first school we checked out was projected to have a junior kindergarten class that year of 36 or 37 kids. My daughter was a shy, quiet kid. She would have been completely lost and overlooked in a class of 37 “kinders.” Thankfully, we had another choice in our neighbourhood.

I know there are many, many other parents who don’t have another choice, and getting a smaller class size for your child shouldn’t come down to luck.

But what the Conservatives have done since forming government in 2018 is to open up a can of gasoline and pour it all over the fire of crowded classrooms. In fact, they wanted classrooms to be even more crowded than they are now. In 2019, they tried to jack up the average high school class to 28 students. Thankfully, parents, teachers and education workers stood up and fought back against that proposal, forcing the government to back down, although they still increased the average class size by one student, to 23.

The government has also been increasing class sizes through stealth, with its underfunding of education. One way that they’re doing that is through e-learning. The government imposed a requirement on all students that they take two online courses in order to graduate high school. Many students, unsurprisingly, protested, as did their parents, so the government provided the ability to opt out. But school boards are being funded based on the assumption that every student is taking those online classes, regardless of whether they’re actually taking them or not.

The government also made the arbitrary decision to set funding for e-learning courses based on a higher class size of 30 students per class. They have offered no evidence to demonstrate that kids need less support in an online class than they do in a classroom, and in fact, all of the virtual learning of the past few years would actually suggest the opposite.

There are many legitimate concerns with the e-learning plan, including the fact that not every child has access to decent Internet at home, and the fact that the agenda seems to be driven more by an interest in letting privatization and commercialization get a toehold in our education system than in actually meeting the needs of students. This is also a form of underfunding by stealth. As students opt out, boards will continue to get the e-learning ratio funding, which means that class sizes in high schools will need to be larger to accommodate the loss of funding.

Then there’s the much bigger picture, which is that Conservatives are cutting education funding in Ontario by not keeping up with inflation. Quite simply, funding for education in Ontario has not kept pace with inflation throughout the entire tenure of this government. Even under the Liberals, the system was not really adequately funded. But since then, the Conservatives haven’t even kept up with the Liberals’ level of funding. If the Conservatives had simply kept pace with inflation, funding would have been $2.5 billion higher this year alone.

And now, by the minister’s own admission, the increase in funding for next year will be way below the rate of inflation. The latest Bank of Canada inflation numbers put inflation at 5.2%. The government’s own projection for inflation this year is 3.6%. The minister’s increase in funding is just 2.7%. So the government’s funding isn’t even keeping up with their own prediction for inflation.

By tabling this bill at the same time as announcing education funding for next year, Ontarians are being distracted from the funding announcement for next year. Because when you compare funding for next year with the funding in place before the Conservatives formed government in 2018, what we see is that average funding per student is down $1,200 when you account for inflation.

As the ever-quotable Laura Walton said, the minister keeps referring to his funding as “unprecedented,” but remember that “unprecedented” can also mean “lower than we’ve ever seen before.”

The minister likes to use the word “historical” a lot. I actually think it’s a pretty apt word because, in some important ways, we’ve seen this movie before. The last Conservative government, under Premier Mike Harris, also drove education funding levels down to very low levels, which resulted in a task force being created to review education funding in Ontario. That report called for a significant increase in education funding because the Conservatives had broken the system so badly.

This underfunding has been driving up class sizes and robbing students of essential supports. The background document that the minister released with the Grants for Student Needs yesterday revealed that for every 1,000 students, school boards now have 3.87 fewer secondary school teachers than they did in 2018. For a medium-sized board of 20,000 students, that’s equivalent to 77 teachers, or roughly the size of one entire high school. What impact do you think that has on the ability of students to learn?

On top of that, school boards have told us that because this government’s funding is lower than inflation and because they refuse to reimburse COVID-related expenditures, school boards are going to have to implement cuts. For the Toronto District School Board, this means the loss of 65 teachers, 35 special education workers, 35 child and youth workers, and 40 school-based safety monitors. In fact, the TDSB has to cut 522 positions because of their deficit; the Toronto Catholic District School Board will have to eliminate 120.

The Ottawa-Carleton District School Board has already voted to eliminate 21 teacher positions and still has to decide what cuts they will make to education worker positions. So we’re already at 663 positions lost in just three boards. How is the minister’s commitment of just one new math lead per board going to make up for that loss? How does the equivalent of one new position for just 20% of our schools make up for these kinds of cuts?

And what about these vaunted new positions that the minister has been bragging about since Sunday? First of all, let’s be clear what we’re talking about. These are not 2,000 new teachers. The government has been very carefully using the word “educators.” That’s because the government is not hiring 1,000 new teachers to support math and reading. The minister has been talking about “math coaches” in classrooms, and that was a commitment in the government’s budget as well. What is a math coach? What are their qualifications? Are they going to have to pass the minister’s famous math tests in order to be hired?

All of this remains to be seen. We have no idea who these math coaches are. Second, let’s put these positions into context, given the size of the Ontario education system. This is less than one additional education worker per school in Ontario—in fact, it’s way, way less. It’s equivalent to one new educator for every two out of five schools. Or, to put it another way, this is one new educator for every 2,850 students to provide reading help and one new educator for every 6,650 students to provide math support.

The minister spent quite a bit of time yesterday going on about math and reading supports and back-to-basics, but his new bill only uses the words “reading,” “math” and “literacy” once. But somehow, just naming it as a priority is supposed to magically help children to succeed at reading and math while in crowded classrooms without additional supports available.

Teachers I spoke with last week in Ottawa told me that demand for resource teachers and for additional supports is at an all-time high. So many kids need help who never needed it before. But the schools don’t have the resources to respond to that demand, so these teachers are constantly trying to triage: Who needs help the most right now? How can we divide the little bit of help that’s available so that every kid gets at least a little bit?

This is not a scenario that demonstrates that we want every child in Ontario to succeed. And adding one new educator to only two out of every five schools isn’t going to be any different in that regard.

It’s not just teachers who are missing in our schools, and it’s not just teachers who help our kids to thrive and succeed. The safe and successful functioning of our schools depends on education workers who support our children, keep them safe, and keep our schools running. Thanks to this government’s underfunding of education and its attack on wages, we don’t have enough education workers either.

School boards are spending more on EAs than they are getting from the government, but they’re still not even close to being able to meet students’ needs.

According to data released by People for Education in February of this year, 93% of schools in Ontario say they need support staff such as educational assistants, administrators, and custodians.

One Ottawa teacher I spoke with last week said that when the EA is not present in her classroom—and she doesn’t have an EA assigned full-time—all learning stops. She has 26 kids, including several with very high needs. Her focus has to be on keeping the kids safe and alive. Without an EA present, she can’t do that and teach the kids at the same time. Unfortunately, it happens at least once or twice a week that the EA isn’t present for the whole day, because the demand for EAs is so high and there aren’t enough EAs available. Schools are desperately trying to triage who needs EA support the most at all times.

I heard from another Ottawa teacher that she had to change two GI tubes last week. That’s work that teachers aren’t supposed to be doing, but there’s no support available for these kids, and the teacher had to put the interests and safety of the child first.

Another teacher told me that there aren’t enough EAs in their school to support children who need help with toileting, so kids in her class are soiling themselves in class, and then she has to track down an EA who can help change the child after that has happened. We have so few EAs that parents are getting regular phone calls to come and pick up their children from school or are told that they can’t take their child to school today because there is no EA available.

Earlier this year, parents at Cootes Paradise Elementary School in the Hamilton-Wentworth school board sent a letter to the minister asking him to take urgent action on this issue. They told the minister, “On Friday, February 3, 2023, several students with additional needs were effectively sent home from the school, because EAs were absent and the school was not equipped to support their additional needs. This has happened to students and their families several times this year but in the last few weeks, it is happening with increasing frequency.”

Children like Desmond, who is four years old, has autism, is non-verbal, and requires assistance with eating and toileting—his mom, Amanda Strong, is getting called regularly to come and pick him up from school because there’s no one available to support him. Amanda told CHCH, “Yeah, he can’t talk, he’s not toilet trained, but he still deserves to be here. He still deserves the right to his education.”

The result of this lack of support is that there are parents who are sitting outside of schools all day in this province just in case their child needs to use the bathroom, but we also know that it’s a minority of parents who can afford to do that. There are also children who are trying to hold it in all day because there’s no EA available to help them. Just imagine trying to learn in that situation.

The EAs who are working in our system are overburdened and are being asked to provide unreasonable levels of support. One EA shared that one day last week, they were the only full-time EA in a school of 800 kids. Every day, after running from classroom to classroom, they go home feeling like they failed because they can’t possibly provide the level of support that is needed to every child.

I wish this was uncommon, but unfortunately, what we’re seeing is that the conditions that teachers and education workers are being asked to work in, with overcrowded classrooms, children with high needs who aren’t getting the supports they need, kids in crisis due to their mental health, and the absolute and utter disrespect from this government—teachers and education workers are getting burnt out and getting sick.

Absence rates are unusually high, both due to the levels of illness circulating and due to burnout and mental health issues. Staff are retiring at much higher rates than usual, and young workers are leaving the profession at worrying rates.

One teacher is on mental health leave after struggling to teach a class of 28 students in which 16 of the students had an IEP, and she had no EA support. The majority of her class required accommodations, but there was zero support.

We don’t have replacements available when teachers or education workers are absent because of the shortage.

Just two weeks ago, we learned that the Ottawa-Carleton District School Board is being forced to close classrooms regularly due to the shortage of replacement teachers. Roberta Bondar Public School had to close two classes in one day. The Ottawa-Carleton District School Board has reported 462 class closures between January and June 2022 and 173 class closures just since November 2022.

In these conditions, how are children supposed to catch up on their math and reading skills—especially for kids who aren’t allowed to come to school?

The minister says his plan is supposed to get even kids with disabilities reading. Well, allow me to remind the minister that in order to learn how to read at school, you have to actually be at school, and these children are not able to be at school all the time because of his policy choices. No amount of setting priorities for school boards is going to change that.

Cette pénurie d’enseignantes et enseignants qualifiés met en péril la qualité de l’éducation francophone en Ontario. Elle rend plus difficile l’apprentissage de la lecture et des mathématiques pour les enfants francophones. Si le ministre s’intéressait vraiment dans la capacité des enfants francophones d’apprendre la lecture et les mathématiques, il ferait tout ce qui est en son pouvoir pour remédier à cette pénurie.

Mais ce que nous voyons, c’est un ministre qui reste les bras croisés, sans rien faire, alors que la pénurie s’aggrave d’année en année.

Le résultat pour les enfants francophones, c’est le chaos. Il y avait plusieurs classes l’année dernière qui ont eu sept, huit ou neuf enseignants pendant l’année scolaire. Comment est-ce que les élèves peuvent apprendre dans ces conditions?

Mais bien que le ministère ait maintenant plus de 900 enseignants de retard sur sa stratégie, il n’y a pas un cent de financement supplémentaire cette année, ni aucune mesure dans ce projet de loi pour aider à résoudre cette pénurie.

Où est le respect de ce ministre pour le droit des francophones à une éducation de haute qualité dans leur propre langue?

It’s not just francophone kids who are getting their constitutional rights trampled on.

Kids with disabilities are also being shortchanged repeatedly. The Education Act states that the Ministry of Education is responsible for setting out a process for identifying and accommodating disability-related needs in the publicly funded school system. But this government significantly underfunds special education, leaving kids with disabilities struggling to participate in our system and unable to get the education they are entitled to.

I’ve already talked about the challenges with just being able and allowed to attend school—then there’s the ability to participate in school. There has been a significant increase in the number of kids in our schools with a disability because of the government’s destruction of the Ontario Autism Program. Kids who would have previously been in therapy rather than in school and kids who would have been in school but with the benefit of therapy that helped them to participate have just gone without any therapy at all.

These kids are in schools, but without adequate funding for special education, leaving parents to fight over scraps to try to get their kids the supports they need, while teachers are left trying to support students who are neither getting the therapy they need outside of school nor the support they need in school.

One parent I spoke to said her son with autism is in a regular class with no EA. He can’t keep up with the curriculum, but she says she knows her son; he will just sit quietly, looking out the window, not causing a fuss, so no one will pay him any attention. But other kids get incredibly frustrated by the lack of support and become violent, lashing out at teachers and education workers.

I’ve spoken to educators in Ottawa who have been given Kevlar to wear at work by the school board because that has become the solution to violence. These are not soldiers in a war zone. These are teachers and education workers in our publicly funded school system.

We are not giving students with special needs the support and resources they need, and we are not giving teachers and education workers the specialized training they need to de-escalate and deal with violence. We’re just sending them to work with Kevlar on.

Other special education teachers have told me that they are crowdfunding or prowling their neighbourhood Buy Nothing groups to stock up their classrooms in order to be able to support their students.

We are already hearing about the elimination of special class placements or congregate classes across the province. Kids are being integrated into regular classrooms because it’s so much cheaper, but it’s happening regardless of whether or not they can succeed there, and without the supports that would allow them to succeed.

And while our special education system is already in crisis, we are in the midst of transitioning as many as 4,000 autism legacy kids into the system with no additional resources and no transition plan. The government cruelly and abruptly capped the funding for therapy for these children. They promised a transition plan, but they didn’t create one. In fact, they didn’t even inform school boards that these children would be coming. They didn’t provide a single additional penny in resources to school boards to support these children.

Michelle MacAdam, who is a teacher and a parent of two autism legacy kids, said, “Being in education myself, I know the lack of supports in schools, and I see these classes that are exploding, and I see the overwhelmed teachers. Now add in this tsunami of high-needs kids that are entering schools in September or in the next few months, you’re going to have a lot of stressed teachers and programs that are overflowing.” She’s worried, first and foremost, about the safety of her children with no EA to support them. They are both non-verbal, flight risks, and at risk of choking from putting things in their mouths.

Neither one is toilet trained. How will they be kept safe and supported at school with no additional resources? And she is not the only parent who is dealing with the repercussions of this government’s reckless funding.

Last week, CBC Radio’s Ontario Today had an hour-long call-in show with heartbreaking story after heartbreaking story about the impact of this government’s decisions on vulnerable kids and their families in this province.

Connie has two kids on the autism spectrum, a 10-year-old and a 20-year-old. Her 20-year-old daughter received needs-based funding as part of the legacy autism program, and because of this, she was able to get through school and is now attending college. This funding is not available for her 10-year-old son. Connie has since had to remortgage her house seven times and continuously access the food bank, even with a dual household income, because her 10-year-old son’s programming is so expensive. He also doesn’t have the support he needs in the classroom.

She feels she is being punished by this government and by the province. All she is asking for is basic support for her son to be able to learn in a safe environment, but instead, her son is taken out of the classroom to wander the hallways.

Margaret has a nine-year-old boy on the autism spectrum. Without needs-based support in his school, her son, who is non-verbal, has often been subjected to isolation, taken out of the classroom and put into a padded room because his teachers and assistants don’t have the training or support to properly address his needs. Margaret says that she has reached out to her Conservative MPP on multiple occasions to no avail.

Students are being left alone because there are not enough teachers, EAs, and education workers available for them. Parents do not feel supported by this government. And transitioning kids from the legacy autism program into schools without support will have even more detrimental costs.

We’ve heard these stories and countless others from parents and educators worried about the lack of any kind of plan for this transition. This government is setting these children up to fail and has left parents and school boards to try to clean up their mess.

And let’s be clear: This has an impact on the safety and ability of all kids to learn in our schools. Putting kids in classrooms with no supports leads to an increase in violent incidents, safety risks for other children, and disruptions in the classroom and evacuation of classes. I’ve seen this happen with my twins, who were in a class that had to be evacuated for safety reasons at least once or twice a week. Despite their young age, they were absolutely exasperated with the number of times they had to go down to the learning commons while their teacher tried to de-escalate a situation.

And these are not the only kids with disabilities that this government has let down. Provincial and demonstration schools across Ontario are grossly underfunded, and as such, this has led to teacher shortages and improper maintenance on school properties.

W. Ross Macdonald School for the Blind in Brantford has been in operation since 1872 and is in desperate need of repairs. They have a rink that has been out of service for more than four years and chronic heating problems in the winter because the boilers continue to fail year after year. These are children who use their hands to communicate. How are they supposed to do that when it’s freezing in their classrooms? Does the minister expect them to use sign language with their mittens on? The pool on-site also remains closed.

Typically, this infrastructure offers the opportunity for deaf students to learn essential skills in water safety from an ASL-using lifeguard. These are skills that they cannot learn anywhere else. So having this pool closed presents a substantive safety risk for students.

And this is not a unique experience for W. Ross Macdonald. It is one of only seven schools under the ministry’s provincial and demonstration schools branch, and we’ve heard of similar issues across all of these schools. One school had an exterior structural issue, causing bricks and stones to be falling down, endangering the students, parents and staff entering the building. It was only when substantial safety concerns were raised to the ministry that they finally installed scaffolding.

Families should not have to beg to be protected by this government, but that has become the reality for families.

Stephanie Antone, a parent of a student at W. Ross Macdonald, told CBC last year, “There’s no justification for why their schools are in the state they’re in and that they are not taking the concerns of parents and staff seriously.

“You are creating a pathway for ODSP. How fair is it that a child with a disability is not given the same resources, and is not treated as important as a student without a disability?”

The reality of underfunding at these schools has gotten so bad that in March of last year, parents and teachers hosted a series of rallies outside of provincial and demonstration schools across the province, demanding more funding and resources from this government.

A parent whose children attend Sir James Whitney, a school for the deaf in Belleville, is deaf herself and attended the same school her children are currently enrolled in. She told Quinte News:

“When I went to this school we had at least 200 students. Now we have 47 students. We can have more students but many parents don’t even know we exist, don’t even know that it’s an option for their students. We’re not allowed to promote our school and the services and programs that are here.

“Deaf children are placed into mainstream programs and many of them do not succeed because of language deprivation. The interpreters may not be fluent. They may not have access to the appropriate courses that they would like to take. They need to have other assessments that aren’t being done.

“We want to preserve it. It’s a part of our history, a part of our culture. My parents went here. They graduated from here. I went here. My children have gone here. I value this community and I value our deaf schools.”

The same cannot be said of the government. David Sykes of the Provincial Schools Authority Teachers said it well: “Why is it that we teachers have to come begging to get the supports we need to provide the programs and services? Why is it we need to point out that they are actively preventing our members from finding kids in the mainstream or finding kids in communities who would benefit from these schools? Why is it the government continues to look at these schools through a deficit lens and not an asset lens?”

We should be improving the funding, the transparency and inclusivity in Ontario’s provincial and demonstration schools, because when we don’t, we are denying these children the right to equal treatment in education.

Let’s be absolutely clear here, Speaker: These schools are under the direct authority of the provincial government. There is no school board here managing these schools that the minister can point the finger at and blame here. The blame lies squarely with himself and his ministry. Perhaps that is why he has been so quiet about these challenges that these students face in learning, the safety risks that they have to run just to be at school.

As a little aside, the minister is proposing training for school board trustees in this legislation, but perhaps he wants to consider some training for Ministers of Education and Ministry of Education staff as well, because what I’ve heard from teachers and union officials with the provincial schools is that the ministry has been incredibly disrespectful about the fact that many of these teachers communicate primarily with sign language.

So just to recap: Our kids are struggling because they’re in crowded classrooms without adequate supports, including EAs; they’re dealing with teacher and education worker shortages; and they are not getting the special education supports that they need and deserve.

They are also dealing with a crisis in mental health that this government is failing to address. A recent report by People for Education reported that 59% of students in Ontario are feeling depressed about the future. More than 90% of principals say that their school needs more support for students’ mental health. Less than one in 10 schools actually have access to a regularly scheduled mental health professional, and half of schools have no access to mental health resources at all.

I hear constantly from parents, teachers, education workers, principals, and mental health professionals about the crisis in our children’s mental health. Rates of anxiety are sky-high.

When I met with the Ontario Association of Social Workers, they told me that even little children are experiencing high levels of anxiety that is making it difficult for them to go to school.

We’ve been through this with one of my children, who had real difficulty transitioning back to in-person school after virtual and has continued to face challenges with going to school day to day. We waited three months for an appointment with the social worker assigned to our school, only to be told that there are no mental health resources available and we are on our own.

Bill 98 allows the minister to set out policies and guidelines regarding the mental health of students, including the materials that have to be used in teaching students about mental health, but there’s not a single additional resource provided here to actually support children who are dealing with mental health challenges. The Grants for Student Needs provide an additional $11.9 million for the salaries of mental health professionals like psychologists and child and youth workers, and that’s a good thing; it’s not nothing, that’s for sure.

But it’s only 3.1 cents per day per child in additional funding, when funding now is already at less than a quarter per child per day. Don’t you think the biggest crisis in children’s mental health following a multi-year global pandemic should merit a little bit more than 27 cents per day?

This crisis in mental health connects, as well, with the shortages that we’re seeing in staffing, because supporting children with increased mental health needs with no mental health resources is putting stress on teachers and education workers and contributing to burnout. The more that we can’t replace teachers and education workers when they’re sick and on leave, the more we’re exacerbating the problem and causing it to snowball.

The other thing is that when children are in crisis and they’re not getting support, we see an escalation in violence. We’re seeing this problem now across the province, unfortunately.

There are many students in the Toronto District School Board who have said they are scared at school because of the uptick in school violence. Students are feeling restless, stressed and anxious after three years of disruptions and years of underfunding. They don’t feel supported. They feel forgotten—

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: Point of order.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): I recognize the member from Barrie–Innisfil on a point of order.

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: I know the member was speaking to the bill, but I think she has sort of gone off track and we’re now talking about Grants for Student Needs, which is not in the bill.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): I will remind the member to make her comments reflect the content of the bill.

Ms. Chandra Pasma: Thank you, Speaker. I’m a little surprised that the member opposite doesn’t understand the connection between school violence and children’s capacity to learn reading, writing and literacy in our schools and what this might have to do with school boards. I am surprised, but—

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: Point of order.

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

I recognize the member from Barrie–Innisfil.

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: The member should be making comments through you and not directed at me and my understanding of the policy items.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): I agree with the member from Barrie–Innisfil. Please make your comments through the Chair.

You may continue.

Ms. Chandra Pasma: Thank you, Speaker. I hit a nerve, I see.

After traumatic episodes of violence and lockdowns, students are just supposed to go back to the classroom, back to learning without any mental health support. Violence is on the rise in school, and the majority of principals and vice-principals within our school boards attribute this to a lack of staffing, support and resources.

The TDSB has a staffing crisis, and students, teachers, parents, and education workers are feeling the pinch. But because of this government’s unwillingness to reimburse them for the $70 million that they had to pay to protect kids during the pandemic, they will be forced to cut even more staff, including child and youth workers and safety monitors. This is only going to make matters worse for our kids.

Don’t our kids deserve to feel safe at school? Don’t they deserve mental health supports in school?

This violence is not just limited to the TDSB. Violent incidents are happening at crisis levels across the province.

In London-area schools, reports by the ETFO Thames Valley District School Board show that there are an average of 636 violent incidents a month. This doesn’t even account for the majority of violent incidents that go unreported. In some cases, kids are even being sent to the hospital with severe injuries.

These are not just incidents occurring among students. Teachers and education workers are met with violence daily.

The Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario is looking into violence against teachers and in schools to see if it will help this government understand the gravity of the situation.

Karen Brown, ETFO’s president, said, “Many school spaces are not safe, especially for those working on the front lines with students whose needs are not being met. We hope the data collected will finally convince this government to take action to address the unacceptable and troubling rise of violence in schools.”

I heard the same thing from Ottawa OECTA teachers last week. The number of violent incidents are rising, but because there’s pressure on teachers not to even report violence, what we know is just a drop in the bucket.

Teachers and education workers have been calling on this government to hire more mental health support staff and provide anti-violence training for the teachers and staff already working in our schools. They’ve been asking this government to work with them. The solutions are there, but instead, the government provides us with legislation that does nothing to address this. Our kids cannot succeed in math and literacy if they do not feel safe in our schools.

In my riding of Ottawa West–Nepean, I’ve heard from several parents and teachers about how their kids don’t feel safe at Pinecrest Public School. The parents who have reached out did not feel comfortable sharing their names, but in speaking with them, it’s clear that these are not isolated incidents. Once again, this is rooted in the lack of mental health supports available to our kids. Pinecrest is a K-to-8 school and is just one of many public schools in Ottawa that has had to cancel classes as a result of being short-staffed. One of my constituents has a six-year-old grandson at Pinecrest.

In two months, her grandson’s homeroom has had three different supply staff, resulting in no consistency and a continuous lack of support for him and his classmates. In February, the students’ parents received an email from their principal informing them that, because of absenteeism, their classes would be cancelled for at least two days. Imagine being in this situation, trying to scramble to see whether you can find child care for your kids or whether you may have to bring them to work with you the following day.

This woman was lucky that she was in a position where she could look after her grandson for a few days while his classes were cancelled.

After continued disruption from the pandemic, this government’s underfunding is resulting in our kids being out of the classroom once again.

Our kids are in crowded classrooms, not getting the supports they need, with teacher and education worker shortages. They’re in a mental health crisis, but schools don’t have the resources to address it, and they’re not feeling safe at schools because of rising violence due to the mental health crisis and the shortage of workers. And what does the minister think is the appropriate response to this situation? A fire sale of school properties.

Instead of investments in mental health supports and smaller class sizes, Bill 98 is giving the minister the power to compel school boards to sell school buildings and land to any individual the minister designates, at any price the minister designates. This is the same government whose cozy relationship with developers always somehow seems to cost the taxpayer money while resulting in sweetheart deals for developers—

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: Point of order.

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

I recognize the member for Barrie–Innisfil.

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: Through you, Speaker: I just wanted to see if there’s any implied motive here.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): I will have to disagree with your comment, and I will allow the member to continue.

Ms. Chandra Pasma: Thank you, Speaker.

Surely, if the sole desire here was to make sure that every child can attend school in their local community regardless of what board they’re in, the regulations on selling or transferring schools could just be limited to school boards.

What we actually need more than the sell-off of publicly held land to private, for-profit corporations is investments to address the repair backlog so that our children can learn in a safe environment. The school repair backlog is currently well over $16 billion; we don’t know by how much because the government stopped publicly reporting on this figure. But we know that committing only $1.4 billion a year to building new schools and repairing existing schools means that the backlog is going to continue to grow instead of shrink.

Our kids are trying to learn in schools that are not in good repair, including schools that are not fully air-conditioned. When the temperatures hit 30 degrees in Ottawa last week, one of the first things I thought of was the poor teachers and students on the second floor of my children’s un-air-conditioned school. Usually it’s not until late May or early June that the temperatures get that high. I’ve sent my kids to school in the past thinking, “Well, they’re not going to learn anything today.

They’re going to be lucky to survive.” Teachers have had to employ creative strategies, including bringing Popsicles to school that they’ve paid for out of their own pockets, and cycling kids through the gym and the learning commons, which have air conditioning. These are our children’s learning conditions.

The government has said over and over again that this legislation is based on what they have been hearing from parents, but I don’t buy it. I have had countless emails come through my inbox since even just the start of this year from parents voicing their concerns with the direction that public education is going. When boards were raising issues about reimbursing COVID relief funds, the emails were pouring in. When the budget was tabled with no real inflationary increases for education included, the emails were pouring in. Since Sunday, the emails have been pouring in again.

Parents who are scared about what this legislation will mean, educators concerned with the Grants for Student Needs numbers all want to know who exactly has been consulted in the creation of this bill—who are the stakeholders that were involved? We know that it wasn’t any of the teachers and education unions, because they were very clear that they were caught completely off guard by this legislation. That’s incredibly insulting when the ministry is in bargaining with these teachers. That’s not how you build a respectful relationship.

Cara Kane, a parent in my riding of Ottawa West–Nepean, sent me an email yesterday with her concerns about this bill and whose interests it represents. She said, “Firstly, it is quite bothersome to state that this is in response to what parents want ... how does he know what we want? What is he basing this off of? There has been no public consultation whatsoever with parents on this proposed bill.

I want my child to go through this world as a kind person, who respects equity and diversity, who advocates for the community and stands up to bigotry, who explores her passions in a supportive environment, whatever they may be—whether it’s math and science, or art and literature, or anything in between. I fear this bill is woefully out of touch with what parents actually want for our children, and there is absolutely no way for the minister to know this without actually engaging in a public consultation process that include the voices of all parents.

I am also deeply concerned about the bill’s new powers, which would require boards of education to report to the minister on these outcomes and provide the minister with the power to dissolve boards and appoint a provincial supervisor in the place of trustees. Communities vote for trustees—having a provincially appointed supervisor who has no relationship to/with the community, no understanding of what the school and community needs or values, and is not elected is insulting at best, and dangerous at worst.”

Instead of that, what we have is a communications exercise that seems largely designed to deflect blame. And what is frustrating is that once again it is our children who pay the price for this minister’s intransigence and this government’s underfunding, just as they have paid the price throughout the past three years.

It is time for the minister to finally accept some responsibility, to finally make the investments that our children so desperately need, and to finally come up with a plan that actually provides our children—every child in Ontario—with the supports that they need to thrive and flourish.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): It is now time for questions and answers.

Mr. Mike Harris: I’m looking forward to getting a chance to take

part in debate a little bit later this afternoon.

I did hear during the member from Ottawa West–Nepean’s dissertation here this morning that she said a lack of capital funding has been something that has plagued the province over the last few years.

I’m just curious to know why $15 billion in capital funding, which is the most the province has ever seen, would be such a plague on the province?

Ms. Chandra Pasma: I suppose the member opposite did not carefully listen to my dissertation, as he thinks he did. He actually wasn’t listening at all.

I did mention the figure $16 billion, which is the school repair backlog—actually, we know that the school repair backlog is even greater than $16 billion; we just don’t know by how much, because the government has refused for several years now to report it. I know the member opposite hasn’t benefited from these new investments in math, but I think the member can probably still do the basic math here that $15 billion is less than $16 billion. We’re not even fully funding the repair backlog. And that funding also has to go to the creation of new schools. So if we wanted to be sure that every child had a safe environment to learn in, we would be investing more.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Further questions?

M. Guy Bourgouin: Merci à ma collègue d’Ottawa-Ouest–Nepean. Vous avez parlé de la situation dans les écoles francophones, la pénurie d’enseignants, de comment il y a, je pense, 300 lettres d’autorisation pour enseigner en Ontario. On sait que dans ce projet de loi, on ne le voit pas. Puis on a entendu aussi des associations des conseils scolaires francophones qui disent que ça ne répond pas au besoin, au grand besoin, parce que—si je vous ai entendu, même—c’était 3 000 dans votre présentation. Si ce n’est pas réparé, ça peut être jusqu’à 3 000, le manque d’enseignants dans les écoles scolaires francophones.

Je vous demande : ce projet de loi-là répond-il aux besoins de la communauté francophone? Et aussi, le manque de respect—vous avez parlé de ce qu’ils font quand ils rencontrent les conseils scolaires francophones et du manque de respect envers eux. J’aimerais vous entendre sur ces deux points-là.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Further questions?

Ms. Laura Smith: I listened intently to the information that was provided by the member opposite.

The reforms proposed in the Better Schools and Student Outcomes Act will ensure that Ontario is getting more classrooms into communities—including the French language.

To be clear, linguistic and denomination educational rights will be protected. In fact, the Ontario Human Rights Commission is pleased to know about the overhauling of the language curriculum and the screening of all young children, in its Right to Read post. Does the member opposite disagree with the Ontario Human Rights Commission?

Ms. Chandra Pasma: Thanks to the member opposite.

What we have seen is that parents have repeatedly complained about the human rights of their children not being respected, and the Ontario Human Rights Commission has had to respond that that is an issue of a lack of government funding rather than a failure on the part of the school boards.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Further questions?

Mr. Terence Kernaghan: I’d like to thank the member from Ottawa West–Nepean for her excellent presentation. I’d like to thank her, as well, for bringing forward the concerns of parents, students, education workers, and trustees from across the province. It’s clear that these voices are not reflected in Bill 98—it’s clear that they were not consulted.

As the member has pointed out, mental health—there are four mentions of it within this legislation, and it only relates to policies and guidelines. There are not any additional resources.

Also, I find it quite concerning, after listening to the member’s presentation, that violence does not appear in this legislation even one time—not even one instance.

My question to the member is, if the government wanted to show legitimate and authentic care for students with special needs, how would they update GSNs in the funding formula?

Ms. Chandra Pasma: Thank you to my colleague for the question.

It is absolutely essential that we take into account the conditions in our schools, because those are our children’s learning conditions. When they don’t feel safe, when they can’t be in the classroom or they can’t be in school because of levels of violence, they can’t learn. When the supports aren’t there, they are unable to learn.

Unfortunately, the way special education is funded, our children with disabilities are not getting supports, and that is disrupting their education. Many of them are not even able to be at school full-day, full-week because of this underfunding. Many of them aren’t getting the supports they need to allow them to participate in learning in the classroom.

A government that actually wanted to help every child in our province to receive a high-quality education would be funding special education based on needs instead of some kind of strange statistical projection that has nothing to do with what is taking place on the ground in our classrooms.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): Further questions?

M me Dawn Gallagher Murphy: Thank you to the member for her speech.

I have to bring your attention to the pillar under accountability and transparency, as this bill proposes to strengthen accountability by requiring school boards, via the proposed legislation, to be more transparent about their spending and how it supports student outcomes. The member from Ottawa West–Nepean, towards the beginning of her speech, talked about the reporting on HVAC systems that were going into school boards. So I would have to think that the member would be supportive, because what this proposed legislation would do is have the school boards accountable for reporting on things like this.

Can the member from Ottawa West–Nepean say this is a good part of this legislation?

Ms. Chandra Pasma: I’m reminded of a chart that someone sent me where step 2 was question mark, question mark, question mark, and step 3 was success, because what we have here is a bill that says the minister can set priorities for our schools in Ontario and that school boards must report on how they are achieving those priorities, but there’s not a single additional resource for school boards to actually implement these priorities and to make sure that kids are meeting the measures expected.

Accountability and transparency are absolutely meaningless when school boards are being forced to make cuts to the teachers and education workers who would actually help our children to achieve success, when schools are lacking the educational workers that would actually allow children to be in classrooms so they could achieve success. Transparency is meaningless without an actual plan to get us from A to B.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): There’s time for one final question. I recognize the member for London West—London–Fanshawe.

Ms. Teresa J. Armstrong: London–Fanshawe, thank you.

There’s lots of great London representation here, so I know how the Speaker could get confused.

I want to thank the member for contributing to debate. She mentioned the legacy funding, the legacy children, near the end of her speech. I just wonder if she could expand on, since there wasn’t a consultation, what that’s going to look like for parents and legacy kids returning back to school.

Ms. Chandra Pasma: Thanks for that great question.

What we’ve seen is that kids who have been in therapy full-time for the past five years are being transitioned abruptly to schools with no support or coordination, no kind of plan. These kids, in some cases, are non-verbal, won’t even be able to understand what is happening. Many of them are flight risks or safety risks. And yet, there are no additional supports to schools to actually keep these kids safe. What the parents of autism children are saying is that this is going to be absolute chaos and set these children—

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): That is all the time for questions and answers.

Further debate?

Mr. Mike Harris: I know we’ve only got about five minutes to get things kick-started here, but I did want to mention that I will be sharing my time, once we resume debate later this afternoon, with the member from Newmarket–Aurora.

Of course, it is a pleasure to join debate today. It has been a good morning here in the House. I know that any member who has heard me stand up in here before will know—and I’m going to say it again for those who haven’t heard—that I have five children, all in public school. That’s why I’m very, very excited to see this bill, hopefully, come to fruition and become law in the province of Ontario. All of us here who are parents—or maybe even, dare I say, there could be some grandparents here in the House.

They’re also, I think, very excited to see a lot more transparency, a lot more accountability, and historic investments being made by the Minister of Education to move education forward in the province of Ontario.

Another thing that may come as a shock to some of the people here is that I’m the son of a former Premier. In my case—

Mr. Matthew Rae: I didn’t know that.

Mr. Mike Harris: Yes. Actually, I believe he was mentioned already by the member from Ottawa West–Nepean this morning. So thank you to her for bringing him up and talking about the excellent legacy that the previous Conservative government had around education here in the province.

But I digress, Madam Speaker. I guess what I’m really getting at is, we’ve got a little bit of an inside track to try to figure out how to navigate the school system, and it can be a challenge for a lot of people.

The key goal for Bill 98 is simple: You should not need to be the son of a former Premier to know who to call about your child’s education. You shouldn’t need to be a former school board trustee to know how to navigate the education system. You shouldn’t need to be a member of provincial Parliament to know the local priorities of your school board. It’s time to make the education system more accessible for the average family. For too long, information on local priorities has been too difficult to access for many families across this province.

This bill, if passed, will make outcomes for families of all backgrounds—and I think that’s key. We’re not just selecting a few; this is for all the people across Ontario, to make education more equitable, and I hope members on all sides of the House can support that.

Bill 98, for the first time in Ontario history, would require school boards to make their plans to improve student achievement public. It would also require them to give every single parent the opportunity to view and review these plans at the start of the year and at the end to measure progress.

The Minister of Education has said this—and I agree: “Our government has no higher purpose than to protect the children of this province.”

I do want to say that one thing that I’ve been able to take

part in was the Safer School Buses Act. Most of you who have seen a school bus here in the province of Ontario over the last year have now noticed that they have a yellow or an amber lens and a red lens. We were the last jurisdiction in North America to adopt this. I know this was something that you were very interested in. We’ve had many—

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Donna Skelly): I apologize to the member from Kitchener–Conestoga, but we’ve run out of time.

Second reading debate deemed adjourned.

Members’ Statements

Hospice Renfrew

Mr. John Yakabuski: Last Saturday, I had the honour of attending a gala dinner in recognition of the 15th anniversary of Hospice Renfrew. It was a wonderful evening that presented the opportunity to honour and recognize not only those who have worked at Hospice Renfrew, but those who have volunteered, as well. A scrumptious meal was served, and board chair Gerald Tracey as well as other members of the board took their turns at the podium offering their thoughts and personal stories about what Hospice Renfrew means to them.

Almost 20 years ago, the original board chair, Jim MacKillican, sought my support in lobbying the government for a six-bed hospice in Renfrew. Once that approval was granted, it was amazing and gratifying to see the community come together, raising the necessary funds through gifts and donations in kind that saw it open its doors in 2008.

Over the past 15 years, Hospice Renfrew has proven to be an absolutely tremendous service for end-of-life care, delivered in a way that only can be provided in a hospice setting. I know of countless families whose loved ones have experienced their last days in the caring, compassionate hands of the people of Hospice Renfrew.

In our changing demographics, it is clear that the end-of-life care delivered in hospices will be needed more now than ever as baby boomers become their residents. Our government recognizes this and is providing funding to hospices at levels never seen in the past.

Congratulations to all at Hospice Renfrew, and I look forward to closely working with you to achieve continued excellence in delivering what only hospice can.

Black Walnut Bakery Café

Ms. Peggy Sattler: I rise today with sadness to share the devastating loss of the Black Walnut Bakery Café, which was destroyed in a fire on Sunday, in my riding of London West.

Located in an historic 145-year-old building, the Black Walnut Bakery Café has been an anchor in London’s treasured Old South neighbourhood since 2011. Owners Ed and Mandy Etheridge are known for their dedication to the community and their commitment to maintaining the heritage feeling of the building. Local residents and Londoners have gathered at this neighbourhood gem for years for coffee, light lunches, and my personal favourite, oatmeal and date scones.

Many thanks to London firefighters who responded immediately when the fire broke out at 1:30 a.m. on Sunday morning, fought the blaze for over eight hours, and conducted search and rescue to confirm the building was unoccupied. These brave men and women ensured everyone was safe. While, luckily, no one was hurt, the structural and roof damage were too substantial, and the building could not be saved.

With overwhelming support from across our city, Ed and Mandy are determined to rebuild this beloved institution and are working to relocate their staff to Black Walnut’s two other locations in the meantime.

I echo comments of the Old South Community Organization: The entire community stands with Ed and Mandy as they plan for the next evolution of the Black Walnut Bakery Café.

Homelessness

M me Dawn Gallagher Murphy: I’m proud to say that Ontarians experiencing or at risk of homelessness will be getting a hand up from our government to be better connected with emergency and transitional housing, including in my community of Newmarket–Aurora.

Last Tuesday, I had the privilege of being at regional headquarters in Newmarket to announce that the regional municipality of York will be receiving more than $36.7 million in 2023-24 under the Homelessness Prevention Program. I am thrilled to say that this represents a 76% increase in annual funding. The boost in this funding is part of the initiative that we are taking to tackle homelessness head-on and provide support for Ontario’s most vulnerable by including an additional $202 million annually in homelessness prevention programs in our 2023 budget, Building a Strong Ontario.

This allocation will allow York region and local supportive housing service managers the flexibility to allocate funding where it is most needed, including capital projects.

I’d like to thank regional chairman Wayne Emmerson, commissioner of community and health services Katherine Chislett, and their entire leadership team for their continued support of our community’s well-being.

I’d also like to thank the member for Thornhill and the member for Markham–Thornhill for joining me last Tuesday.

Northern Health Travel Grant

M me France Gélinas: The Northern Health Travel Grant was set up to ease the financial burden on northerners having to travel down south for medical reasons.

As it currently exists, the Northern Health Travel Grant is leaving many northern patients in vulnerable situations, unable to access the care that they need. You see, Speaker, a patient needs to have the money upfront to travel to see a medical specialist down south, and then they wait, weeks or months later, to get reimbursed. Many low-income patients cannot afford those upfront costs, so the door to treatment for them is shut.

There is a list on the Ministry of Health website with 17 agencies in Nickel Belt that the minister says provide upfront funding to those in need. My OLIP intern Sophie called each and every one of them. If you are a member of a First Nation, if you’re on Ontario Works or the Ontario Disability Support Program, or if you’re a child registered with Easter Seals, there is a bit of help for you. But for most people, there is no help available.

Minister, this is wrong. People should not have to come to see me desperate for care but not able to afford a bus ticket to Toronto to get the care they need.

It’s clear that Ontario needs an emergency fund available to the people of the north facing these circumstances, because what we have now does not work.

John Brummell

Ms. Goldie Ghamari: Mr. Speaker, it’s with a heavy heart that I rise today to share some very sad news from the riding of Carleton. The last remaining member of the two-man team that covered local news across the riding of Carleton for nearly half a century has passed away. John Brummell, a long-time community activist and photojournalist, passed away peacefully in his home on March 18, 2023.

John Brummell was very devoted to his wife, Rosemary, his daughter, Deborah, and his son-in-law, AJ, as well as to his family, friends and his community.

As an active volunteer in the community, John was a member of the Goulbourn historical society and the Goulbourn horticultural society, and a director with the Richmond Agricultural Society, just to name a few. His lifelong contribution as a volunteer was his commitment to making our communities a wonderful place to live.

John received a city of Ottawa City Builder Award in 2017 because of his incredible success at bringing the community together through his involvement and love of photography.

The 80-year-old Stittsville resident was a familiar face around town, with many of his friends, family, and members of the community fondly recalling his ready grin and joyful laugh. Wherever news was breaking or the community was holding an event, no matter how humble the occasion, we all looked forward to a visit from John Brummell or his colleague John Curry, who passed away last year, on February 5, 2022.

With John’s passing, it’s truly the end of an era for the community.

I would like to pass along my deepest condolences to John’s wife, Rosemary, his daughter, Deborah, his son-in-law, AJ, his family and friends, as well as to everyone in the community.

May he rest in peace, and may he always serve as a reminder to the rest of us about the importance of community journalism.

March of Dimes

Mrs. Jennifer (Jennie) Stevens: I rise as a proud member of the St. Catharines community, celebrating the incredible volunteers who make our community so dynamic and so inclusive.

There are so many organizations with so many great volunteers. However, today, I would like to acknowledge March of Dimes during Volunteer Week in Ontario.

March of Dimes will be hosting their 37th annual volunteer appreciation event in St. Catharines. This will be the first time since the pandemic that they have been able to host this event. Some 29 volunteers will be celebrated, ranging from 2020 to the present. These extraordinary individuals embody the spirit of selflessness, compassion, and unwavering dedication to making a positive impact on the lives of others.

Let us express our heartfelt appreciation for their tireless efforts, and let us be inspired by their example as we strive to create more inclusive and vibrant communities in Ontario.

Innovation Arena

Mr. Mike Harris: I was pleased to join the Premier last week as we announced a $7.5-million investment to help build a state-of-the-art Innovation Arena at the University of Waterloo in downtown Kitchener. It has been an honour to work with the fine folks at the University of Waterloo and the city of Kitchener to see this project come to fruition. The new $35-million facility will be a hub for innovation in Ontario’s life sciences sector. Why is this important? First, breakthroughs in health care will enhance the quality of life for our residents here in Ontario. Second, it will attract additional investment to create great jobs and see start-ups grow.

But it goes beyond this single facility. The region of Waterloo is home to an innovation ecosystem.

Dr. Vivek Goel, president and vice-chancellor of the University of Waterloo, said that the Innovation Arena will play a crucial role in expanding the impact and scope of the University of Waterloo’s flagship incubator, Velocity.

Our government is committed to supporting incubators across the province. These investments will fast-track the discovery, development and commercialization of made-in-Ontario research.

Our message to innovators is clear: From start to scale, we are here with you every step of the way.

Health care

Mr. Ted Hsu: Picture this: Late afternoon, people are lined up in the cold—one on crutches—outside a family medicine clinic. This is reality in Kingston. And these people have a family doctor. They’re just lining up for the after-hours clinic.

Kingston had about 25,000 people without a family doctor, as documented in the 2020 Kingston Region Physician Review Report. And now, six doctors are retiring in May, after trying unsuccessfully to find younger ones to take over—that’s another 10,000 people without a family doctor. And as my office confirmed by phoning every clinic, there’s only one walk-in clinic left in all of Kingston.

Kingstonians are scared. Entire families are scrambling to find a new family doctor. Some people have literally phoned every doctor in Kingston. People don’t know where they’re going to get their refills for restricted drugs. They’re losing well-baby checkups. They’re managing chronic conditions on their own. They’re losing follow-ups after hospital and specialist care. They’re standing in hospital hallways waiting for outpatient clinics to triage them.

As the government decides how to handle the primary care crisis, I must remind Minister Jones that the situation in Kingston is particularly acute. We need family doctors in Kingston. It should be designated a high-need community.

Housing

Mr. Anthony Leardi: I have more great news from the riding of Essex. In Essex, we have two really super builders. They are Rosati Group and Jones Realty Inc. They are putting up a 74-unit apartment building in the town of Amherstburg, which is my hometown. That might not be a big building for a city like Toronto, but for Amherstburg it is a big building. It’s going to let 74 families stay in the town of Amherstburg and live and work in the town of Amherstburg—or if you want to downsize, you’re going to be able to stay in the town of Amherstburg and live in the town of Amherstburg. That’s good news for people who want to live, work and stay in the town of Amherstburg.

So I want to encourage great builders like Jones Realty and Rosati construction to keep doing the great jobs that they’re doing.

And I want to encourage the Associate Minister of Housing and the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing in their crusade to build 1.5 million homes in the province of Ontario, because people in Ontario should stay in Ontario and have a home in Ontario.

George Leslie Mackay

Mr. Ernie Hardeman: I rise today to recognize a great Canadian and Taiwanese hero, Dr. George Leslie Mackay. This year would have marked his 179th birthday, and all these years later he’s still remembered and celebrated in both Canada and Taiwan.

George Leslie Mackay was born and raised near Embro, in Oxford county.

As a young Presbyterian missionary, Mackay travelled to Formosa, now known as Taiwan, and founded a mission in the town of Tamsui. While on that first mission, he fell in love with the island and its people, embracing it as his adopted homeland. He married a local Formosan named Minnie, started a family there, and set about helping people in any way he could, including practising dentistry as a method of outreach.

During his almost 30 years on the island, he built several schools, including the first school for girls, and Oxford College, and a hospital. He advocated for women’s rights and public medical care, and he fought against discrimination.

Today, Mackay’s legacy lives on in the schools that he founded, the cutting-edge Taiwanese health care system, and strong friendships between Taiwan and Ontario. In fact, Oxford county is now twinned with the Tamsui district.

I know that the black-bearded barbarian—as Mackay was often called—would be proud of the vibrant, pluralistic democracy that Taiwan is today.

May we continue to share a special bond and advance the values he championed.

Introduction of Visitors

Ms. Bhutila Karpoche: I’d like to give a very warm welcome to the Girls’ Government group from Parkdale–High Park. We have, from Annette Street public school and High Park alternative school: students Olivia Walli, Ryo Kumar, Amelia Wallis, Maya Jordan, Vesper Johnson, Jo Connors-Robertson, Soleece McBrien; teachers Kelly Iggers and Christine Rowe Quinn; parent Jeanhy Shim; and from Humbercrest Public School: students Kayden Rankin-Goodman, Maya Witty, Clara Winders-d’Eon, Ella Kemper, Nesiah Craig-Williams, Evelyn Dinis, Ava Macklin; and teacher Jessica Bailey.

Welcome, and thank you for being here.

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: It’s my great pleasure to introduce a delegation here today from Ducks Unlimited who are having a reception here tonight, in the legislative dining room, at 5:30. I’d like to wish a warm welcome today to Joanne Barbazza, Jessica Whyte, Kimberley Kerr, Phil Holst, Sean Rootham, and Mike Williams. Welcome.

Ms. Doly Begum: I’m very delighted to welcome two grade 5 classes from St. Agatha Catholic School who are here with us today, with teachers Shannon Murphy, Deirdre Moloney-Sciberras, Hyacinth Fernandes, Kathleen Dillon, and Theresa Moulds.

We also have with us trustee Nancy Crawford in the House.

Welcome to your House.

Mr. Ernie Hardeman: Mr. Speaker, we have a delegation in the gallery today from the Taipei Economic and Cultural Office: Director General Jin-Ling Chen; Edward Chung of the Canadian Mackay Committee; and members and friends of the Taiwanese community.

Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Incidentally, they came here to hear the statement I just made.

Ms. Chandra Pasma: I’m very pleased to have the opportunity to welcome not one but two constituents from Ottawa West–Nepean today. We have with us Melodie Gondek, who is with the Ontario Secondary School Teachers’ District 25 and does great work on behalf of students in Ottawa, and Maria Sardelis, who is an advocate for seniors and people with disabilities. Welcome.

Hon. Todd Smith: I’d like to welcome some guests from the township of Stirling-Rawdon. On behalf of myself and MPP Bresee, we’d like to welcome: Dean Graff, one of the councillors there; Caroline Smith, also a councillor; and their guest, Karen West.

Caroline Smith ran the Stirling theatre for years, and it’s great that she has the opportunity to see some political theatre here this morning.

Ms. Catherine Fife: Akshitha Puttur is the page captain today from Waterloo, and she is joined here today by her mother and her sister Aishwarya, who just participated in the federal-provincial government model.

Congratulations, and welcome to your House.

MPP Lise Vaugeois: It gives me great pleasure to welcome, from the Access to Seniors and Disabled advocacy group, Maria Sardelis from Ottawa and Cherie Vandevenne from Chatham. Thank you for coming.

I would also like to welcome, from Congress of Union Retirees of Canada, Lance Livingstone and Ron Vanderwalker.

Thank you so much for your advocacy.

Mrs. Jennifer (Jennie) Stevens: They’re not here in the House, but I know they’re watching this morning. I welcome them to Toronto—my grandson Greyson Uhryn as well as Chase Uhryn.

Thanks for the cookies and milk this morning.

Question Period

Land use planning

Ms. Marit Stiles: Yesterday, the Premier said there was no rhyme or reason to how lands were selected to be protected as part of the greenbelt. He said the greenbelt was formed by “a bunch of staffers in a room with crayons and highlighters and randomly just went on a map.”

If the Premier thinks the greenbelt wasn’t formed using a proper process, well, can he finally share his process for removing lands from the greenbelt?

Hon. Doug Ford: I’m glad the Leader of the Opposition heard me yesterday, because that’s the truth. I talked to people who were in the room. They sat there with a big map and they literally got highlighters—a bunch of staffers joking around, going up and down the roads. We know that’s true. Do you know why, Mr. Speaker? The Liberals changed it 17 times. They decreased the greenbelt; we increased it by over 2,000 acres. Some land shouldn’t be in the greenbelt, and some should be in the greenbelt, and we’re expanding the areas that we feel should be in the greenbelt.

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

Ms. Marit Stiles: I tell you, it really makes you wonder, Speaker, if this government’s process was a bunch of Conservative Party donors in a backroom with crayons and highlighters and a map of the land they could buy up in order to turn a profit. Because the reality is, after the Conservatives were elected, six developers paid a combined $278 million for land that could not be developed within the greenbelt. Then, suddenly, it was all removed. And five of these developers have lobbying records revealing their connections back to the Conservative Party. No one would spend that kind of money if they didn’t think it would be open for development and they could cash in.

Again to the Premier: How did the government decide which parcels of land would be removed from the greenbelt?

Hon. Doug Ford: The decision was very easy. We’re in a housing crisis right now; costs are going through the roof. It was very simple—supply and demand.

When we looked at the map—it’s butt up against existing communities. As a matter of fact, one piece of field, I’ll call it, about 10 acres, had housing all around all four corners—in an empty field with weeds in it. They call that the greenbelt? That’s not the greenbelt. That’s just a field with a bunch of weeds, and people around that neighbourhood all want it to be developed.

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

Ms. Marit Stiles: Wow. Very technical analysis there by the Premier.

The Conservatives’ greenbelt grab is not about housing. If this government cared about investing in Ontario’s housing stock, we’d see investment in public housing and in building homes that everyday Ontarians could actually afford to live in; not luxury mansions, on sprawl. Ontarians are following the money. They know it’s not about housing. It’s about insiders with connections to the Conservatives buying up land super cheap and then selling it off, developing it, for incredible profit.

Once again to the Premier, one more chance: Who was holding the crayons when the government decided to sell off the greenbelt?

Interjections.

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

To reply, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

Hon. Steve Clark: Another fable by the New Democratic Party is being told in the Legislature this morning.

Through you, Speaker: She talks about public commitment for housing. Well, Minister Bethlenfalvy, under the leadership of Premier Ford, tabled a wonderful budget—

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’m going to ask the minister to withdraw his unparliamentary comment and conclude his answer.

Hon. Steve Clark: Withdraw.

We added $202 million to our Homelessness Prevention Program. And I want to thank members from both sides of the House for doing some great announcements last week—in fact, one of the ones was the member for Niagara West, who made a fantastic announcement that the member for Niagara Falls was pleased to attend. So some of her own members are celebrating the public commitment this government has made to ending homelessness by adding that additional $202 million. I don’t know about the Leader of the Opposition, but some of her members have got with the program.

Hospice care / Cost of living

Ms. Marit Stiles: Yesterday, my colleague the member for Sudbury stood in this House and told us that a hospice in his riding is having to rely on a food bank and fundraisers in order to feed its residents. This government responded by bragging about generous individual donations. It’s almost as though this government wants Ontarians to think that it’s perfectly normal for a hospice, where people go for end-of-life care, to have to rely on a food bank so its residents don’t go hungry in their final days. Speaker, my question is to the Premier, and it’s a simple one: Does this government think that is acceptable?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Deputy Premier and Minister of Health.

Hon. Sylvia Jones: I also should have highlighted yesterday—and the member from Sudbury would know this—that earlier this year, we actually gave that particular hospice over $2 million. Why? Because we saw the need. We saw the excellent work that they were doing. We saw the pressures that they were under as a result of ongoing commitments that they have within their community to ensure that that hospice can continue to provide excellent service.

Speaker, in our health document, we actually talk about expansions to hospice and palliative care. We, as a government, have made that commitment and will continue to make that commitment, because we understand and appreciate how important palliative and hospice are in our province, and continue to be.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Ms. Marit Stiles: Speaker, it is shocking enough for a hospice to rely on a food bank, but usage is up across the board too.

I’ve been travelling around this province listening to ordinary Ontarians, and what I’ve been seeing is shocking—people working full-time jobs who can’t get by, people visiting food banks for the first time. One in 14 families in the Waterloo region—in Vaughan–Woodbridge, 36% of food bank visitors were children; in Kawartha Lakes, it’s 50%. In Mississauga, food bank use is up 400% over the last eight years.

Speaker, food banks have asked this government to tackle the root causes of food insecurity, yet the most recent budget provides almost nothing.

Will this government bring in measures like real rent control to make life more affordable for ordinary Ontarians?

Interjections.

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

To reply, the parliamentary assistant and member for Oakville.

Mr. Stephen Crawford: If I were the opposition, this is probably not a path I would walk down, and the reason is, because you have voted against every single measure we have taken to help the people of Ontario.

Let’s take a look at what the government of Ontario has done to help the people of Ontario. We have reduced energy costs so families can afford reliable energy. We have kept transit affordable by removing doubling fares and extending fare integration. We are supporting parents with 46,000 new child care spaces since we took office, saving parents, on average, $8,500. We are also helping post-secondary students with a 10% tuition freeze, which the opposition has opposed. Importantly, we’ve also brought in the most important tax credit in the history of Ontario: the LIFT tax credit, lowering taxes for lower-income individuals.

Where was the opposition when we brought these proposals forward?

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

Ms. Marit Stiles: Wake up. We don’t support your plan because it’s not working.

I wish this government would spend less time in the backrooms and more time talking to real people in this province who are really struggling right now.

I was recently in Northumberland county, where a single person on Ontario Works has to spend as much as 50% of their very limited income on food, at a time when housing costs there and across this province are going through the roof.

Food banks were created as a temporary measure. They’re supposed to be a band-aid solution, and now we have way too many people relying on them just to be able to survive.

To the Premier: Will this government immediately double OW and ODSP rates to get people the relief they need, so people do not go hungry in the province of Ontario?

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’d ask the members to take their seats.

And I’ll remind the members to make their comments through the Chair.

The response?

Mr. Stephen Crawford: Again, we understand there are issues with inflation in this country, which I would hope the opposition would understand—with grocery inflation, with the Ukraine war and other issues.

However, we have made initiatives to help the people of Ontario. We put through a gas tax cut just last year and extended it through this year, for 5.7 cents a litre. Again, if I recall, the opposition voted against that. That is helping every single family in this province, every single business lower costs—bring inflation down, and help people to be able to feed their families, and help those businesses.

We’ve also, in this most recent budget, helped low-income seniors by expanding the GAINS program.

We’ve also increased ODSP payments by 5%—as well as expanding the number of people who are eligible for this program.

We will continue supporting the people of Ontario.

We’re seeing record employment growth, record business investment, and the people of Ontario are on a good trajectory right now.

School nutrition programs

Mr. Wayne Gates: My question is to the Premier.

Children in Niagara are going hungry at school under this government’s watch. Niagara Nutrition Partners, which provides breakfast, snacks and lunches to students, have been forced to close nutrition programs at 16 schools, with nearly 50 more being affected. They face a significant funding gap from the province as food prices soar. Students can’t learn and thrive when hungry. They have gone from feeding 17,000 kids to 24,000 kids a day. It’s shameful that this government will allow such a reality for children in the province.

Will the Premier follow the lead of other provinces across the country and provide the necessary emergency funding so that children in Niagara don’t go hungry?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): To respond, the Minister of Children, Community and Social Services.

Hon. Michael Parsa: I thank the honourable member for the important question.

The Student Nutrition Program that the member is referring to is receiving annual funding of $27.9 million.

We’ve said from the beginning that we will make sure that student and youth who deserve all of the supports get it in every way, shape or form.

If you look at the support that we provided to the municipalities, the $1.2 billion, that helped them with food, with housing, with shelter—the $8 million towards Feed Ontario; and then $83 million towards the Ontario Trillium Foundation, to provide grants to help food banks across the province.

Once again, we will be there for children, for youth and families across this province, and we will not let them down—every day.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The supplementary question? The member for St. Catharines.

Mrs. Jennifer (Jennie) Stevens: Back to the minister: Let’s be crystal clear—here are the numbers from the border to Beamsville: 16 schools have closed their nutrition program, 30 more are projected to close, and 49 have been affected. We are facing a $400,000 shortfall.

We all know food prices are going up and affordability is down, but this is not an excuse to let children go hungry.

I need a response from the minister that puts these children first. I need to hear these words: “This is not okay. I am going to look into it.”

To the minister: Will you commit to assessing this program, and will you commit to emergency funding so children in Niagara do not go hungry?

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

Hon. Michael Parsa: Mr. Speaker, I can assure the member that not a single child or youth will ever be forgotten under this government—that’s why.

I’ll be very clear: Under the previous government, the Student Nutrition Program was just receiving support and investment of over $8 million; today, that amount is $27.9 million.

The member is asking for action. I told her from day one that I will work night and day to make sure that every single program that’s being offered to the people of this province is at its best, and every day we’ll make sure that it’s improved. I ask the honourable member to join us.

The cost of living is rising. Why are they supporting a carbon tax that adds a cost to every single thing in this province?

Interjections.

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

There’s a great deal of enthusiasm in the House this morning on both sides. We have 45 minutes to go.

Restart the clock.

Next question.

School facilities / Refugee services

Ms. Effie J. Triantafilopoulos: My question is for the Minister of Education.

Over the past decade, Ontario’s population has grown rapidly. This means that more families now call Ontario home, and more children have enrolled into our publicly funded education system.

The previous Liberal government failed to plan for the future and shamefully closed 600 schools at a time when they should have addressed the growth in our province.

I am hearing concerns from parents about the importance of their children being able to attend a school near them. Families are counting on our government to take action when it comes to providing top-quality schools for their children.

Can the minister please explain how our government is ensuring that new and existing schools will address future growth needs?

Hon. Stephen Lecce: I want to thank the member from Oakville North–Burlington. She’s a school building machine—five schools in four years. Amazing. She’s a strong advocate for the people of Oakville North–Burlington.

Mr. Speaker, while in Halton region we have wonderful municipal partners to work with us to get schools built in anywhere between one to three years, in many of our communities it takes upwards of a decade to build a school. That’s going to come to an end.

The Premier is committed to getting on with streamlining and overhauling our capital approval process so we build where the growth is.

We have 300,000 people, according to federal immigration targets, coming next year and every year.

We have to work harder and smarter to build better for our kids.

This plan in the legislation allows us to streamline approvals, enables joint-use projects with community, allows school boards to work together and collaborate to share their assets for educational purposes. It enables us to build through a $14-billion capital plan to renew schools and build new schools for the future.

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

Ms. Effie J. Triantafilopoulos: Thank you to the minister for that great response and for those five new schools in my community.

Strong public education and a sustainable school infrastructure system are fundamental in meeting the needs of growing communities like mine in Oakville North–Burlington and across Ontario.

Across our province, many communities continue to welcome and embrace Ukrainian refugees who are fleeing persecution and war in their home country. In our local schools, Ukrainian children have been welcomed into classrooms, where they are receiving a top-quality education in communities that they now call home.

Can the minister please explain how our government is supporting our schools to provide a safe and welcoming environment for Ukrainian children and their families?

Hon. Stephen Lecce: Canada has been, through our history, a safe haven for individuals fleeing persecution and war, and that is a great heritage which we could be proud of as Canadians.

Ukrainians are fleeing a war zone due to Vladimir Putin’s genocidal war—an illegal war that has created so much impact on so many people around the world.

Canada has opened our arms, Ontario has opened our arms, and in our education system, through the most recent funding announcement, we have reaffirmed to school boards that we will fund every Ukrainian child who comes through our country to have free, publicly funded education. We are extending subsidies and daycare for their mothers, their parents and guardians. We are ensuring mental health supports in their language through a partnership with the Ukrainian Canadian Congress. We are working together to make sure that those children who have faced so much trauma and affliction have the supports and the confidence that they can succeed in this country.

Services for seniors and persons with disabilities

Ms. Chandra Pasma: With food inflation at 10%, this government has given Meals on Wheels in Ottawa just a 2% increase and taken away their emergency subsidies. As a result, on April 1, Meals on Wheels had to increase prices. For their lowest-income clients, prices increased over 300%. Seniors, people with disabilities, and patients just released from the hospital depend on these meals for nutritious food. But since the price increase, some of Ottawa’s most vulnerable residents have had to cancel their meals.

Why is this government making vulnerable people go without food instead of providing community organizations like Meals on Wheels with decent support?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Deputy Premier and Minister of Health.

Hon. Sylvia Jones: I’m not sure where the member was when we had our budget, but there was actually a very substantial increase in community care and community supports, like organizations such as Meals on Wheels. We know, because of the use of volunteers and community commitment, as well as paid staff, the Meals on Wheels organizations in all of our ridings have done exceptional work during the pandemic, while we needed to keep those connections.

In fact, I met last week with organizations to talk about how the investments we announced in the budget can be used to most effectively continue to treat our seniors and our most vulnerable in-community, just as we’ve highlighted in our Your Health document.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The supplementary question. The member for Ottawa Centre.

Mr. Joel Harden: I regret to inform the minister that she really should have consulted some of her senior officials, because Meals on Wheels Ottawa, Meals on Wheels elsewhere aren’t reporting any increases in their budget—are there?

Interjection: Nope.

Mr. Joel Harden: There seems to be a disconnect between what this government wants to believe and organizations that are working hard to help seniors and people with disabilities and people in poverty.

You have to ask the question: Why is this government defunding Meals on Wheels? Why is this government wanting to push people into the arms of the grocery store chains that are ripping people off with price gouging on bread, milk and other essentials? Could it be because this Premier is personal friends with the Weston family? Could it be because this Premier once said, “God bless the Weston family”? Is that why—

Interjections.

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

I’m going to caution the member on his use of language, first of all, because of the reactions it caused in the House, and remind members that it is in the standing orders that we should not impute motives.

I will allow the member to conclude his question.

Mr. Joel Harden: Thank you, Speaker.

I just want to ask the Premier, why is he favouring profits for Loblaws over funding for Meals on Wheels?

Hon. Sylvia Jones: Tomorrow, I’m going to make sure that the member opposite has a copy of the endorsement of the investments that we’ve made from community organizations like Meals on Wheels, who understand that the investments we announced in the budget are going to make a quantitative difference in the lives of the people they serve in-community. Because we know, appreciate and understand what they are doing, we have made an additional investment in the budget.

I’ll make sure you get a copy of the press release.

Ontario Place

Ms. Christine Hogarth: My question is for the Minister of Infrastructure.

Under the previous Liberal government, key infrastructure, tourism and recreational facilities like Ontario Place were unfortunately neglected. Instead of making investments and partnering with businesses to enhance the iconic waterfront location, they chose to close many of the features and attractions.

Ontario Place still holds great potential and opportunities for year-round enjoyment, as a place for everyone, no matter if it’s Ontario families or you’re coming from somewhere around the world.

That is why our government must act now to follow through on our promise to bring Ontario Place back to life. We cannot allow this once-in-a-generation opportunity to pass us by.

Can the minister please explain what our government’s plan is to revive the amazing Ontario Place?

Hon. Kinga Surma: The member is absolutely right; we are bringing Ontario Place back to life, and we will be making it a place that everyone can enjoy.

Yesterday, I joined the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Sport and the Premier to announce that we are moving the Ontario Science Centre to Ontario Place. We also announced that Live Nation will be renewing their lease with the province of Ontario and also building a brand new stage that will be active and operational all year around.

Mr. Speaker, with wonderful tenants like the Ontario Science Centre, Live Nation, and Therme, there will be lots for families to do. We are so excited that families will be able to spend all day there, from morning till night, every single day of the year.

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

Ms. Christine Hogarth: I want to thank the minister for that response.

Under the leadership of this government, Ontario clearly has a vision and a plan for Ontario Place that’s going to make it, once again, the world-class destination that it once was.

I remember, as a young girl, coming here in the late 1970s with my dad to visit Ontario Place, but it has changed so much. Now we go see concerts and we see places that are closed, and it’s derelict, and it needs paint, and it needs upgrades. There’s so much more that we can do to make that place so much better. Despite these years of neglect and deterioration—it’s really sad that previous governments did not see this jewel in our community and fix it up and take that time.

I once again want to thank the minister for her leadership. And can she please expand on some of the new features and plans that will rebuild and revitalize Ontario Place for generations to come?

Hon. Kinga Surma: We are bringing it back to life. In fact, work will start in May in terms of the site servicing so that we can have electricity and running water and improve the quality of water on the site.

But what I’m most excited about was releasing the final renderings of the whole vision of Ontario Place, which include 43 acres of public realm and park space, which is bigger than Trinity Bellwoods Park. This wonderful space will now have boardwalks, piers, public beaches, waterfront access, a brand new marina, children’s play areas, as well as food and beverages.

Mr. Speaker, we are excited that the final renderings are out in the public. We are completing the environmental assessment. And we will bring Ontario Place back to life.

Tenant protection

Ms. Bhutila Karpoche: My question is to the Premier.

Over 550 tenants of Livmore High Park signed and delivered a letter asking their corporate landlord, GWL Realty, to stop rent increases of up to 14% this year. GWLR responded, saying that the building, being new, is not subject to guideline rent increases and pointed out that rent for a one-bedroom in High Park has gone up 46% compared to last year.

Does the Premier believe that a 46% increase in rent is manageable by tenants?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): To reply, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

Hon. Steve Clark: The member opposite has a fundamental difference with the government on creating affordable housing.

We are in the middle of a housing supply crisis, and we’re going to do everything in our power to build more purpose-built rental. We made a conscious decision. We delivered on our promise to existing tenants to protect rent control. In 2018, we made the exemption in the fall economic statement for one reason and one reason only, and that was to incent the construction of purpose-built rental. What happened last year? I’ve said it many times in the House: We had a record of 15,000 purpose-built rental starts in Ontario because of that. And already this year, we’re seeing bright signs in this city.

We’re seeing permits for purpose-built rental five times higher than they were at the same time a year ago.

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

Ms. Bhutila Karpoche: What tenants in Ontario have experienced under this government is skyrocketing rents.

This is over 550 tenants and their families impacted in just one neighbourhood in my riding. Imagine how many tenants are impacted across this province.

There has to be some predictability in how much one can expect to pay in rent year after year. No one can manage unpredictable cost-of-living increases.

Minister, will you ensure that all tenants, regardless of when their building was built, can have stability in their rents?

Hon. Steve Clark: We are not going to go back to the failed policies of the 1990s, when they were in power and no purpose-built rental was built in Ontario.

We invoked the cap this year because of the inflationary rate, to ensure that the maximum under rent control was 2.5%.

We delivered in the middle of the pandemic. The Attorney General blocked evictions in the middle of the pandemic to protect the most vulnerable. We capped rent increases in the middle of the pandemic.

We have stood up year after year after year to protect tenants and strengthen the stock of community housing and purpose-built rental housing, and we are going to continue.

The question, though, before the House, with all of our renter protections in the bill before the House, Bill 97—will that member and her party, the New Democrats, support those rental protection measures in Bill 97? Yes or no?

Affordable housing

Mr. Mike Schreiner: My question is for the Premier.

The housing affordability crisis is getting worse, not better. Over 185,000 families are on the wait-list for social housing.

Until the mid-1990s, Canada was building 20,000 non-profit and co-op houses each and every year. In Ontario alone, 14,000 co-op homes were built between 1989 and 1995. In fact, 93% of our current below-market rental supply was built before 1996.

But instead of building more homes that people can actually afford, in the communities they want to live in, this government is imposing an expensive sprawl agenda that municipalities and families simply cannot afford.

Speaker, I want to give the Premier an opportunity today to commit to making the financial investment to build 122,000 non-profit and co-op homes—deeply affordable—over the next decade.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): To reply, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

Hon. Steve Clark: Thanks for the question.

I always say this about the Liberal-Green alliance: They always talk a good game in their questions, but they never deliver on it when the votes come.

Exactly what this member talks about, allowing a young family to have the opportunity to build a home that meets their needs and their budget, close to where they grew up—that’s exactly what the policies we’re consulting on right now will provide.

The member talks about supporting farms and farm families. It’s going to be very interesting to see if he supports our initiatives to allow sons and daughters of farmers to be able to have a property on the family farm—or more importantly, to talk about workers and the opportunity to have a lot on a farm. to upgrade the opportunity for farm workers to have not just employment but a home there.

We’ve put all those policies down in some progressive bills in this House that this member has voted down every single time.

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

Mr. Mike Schreiner: I don’t vote for legislation that doesn’t work. That’s just kind of how I roll over here. I actually want some legislation that’s going to build affordable homes in communities where people want to live.

Maybe the minister is saying that he will support my Bill 44 and Bill 45 that will allow fourplexes and four-storey walk-up apartments, will allow six- to 11-storey mid-rise apartments as-of-right in this province—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order.

Mr. Mike Schreiner: Let’s get rid of that red tape and allow people to build homes in communities they want to live in, instead of paving over the farmland that feeds us—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order.

Mr. Mike Schreiner: —contributes $50 billion to the province’s economy.

Speaker, is—

Interjection.

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

The Minister of Municipal Affairs will get a chance to respond, if he chooses to do so. In the meantime, I encourage him to—

Hon. Doug Ford: Oh, he has to finish? I’m so excited to answer.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Oh, okay.

I apologize to the member for Guelph.

Start the clock.

You can conclude your question.

Mr. Mike Schreiner: It’s good the Premier is excited, because I’m excited for the answer.

Will the government support Bill 44 and Bill 45, to build homes instead of paving over the farmland that feeds us?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Premier.

Hon. Doug Ford: Thank you for the question from the member.

I just want to give some stats. Stats Canada came out with February’s numbers—a 25% increase in condo permits, the highest increase in the entire country, which is great.

Mr. Speaker, do you know what really irks me? I really like the leader of the Green Party, but let me tell you something: It’s a little rich when he gets up and says, “Housing, housing.” As the Minister of Municipal Affairs says, “It’s all talk, no action.”

There are 444 municipalities in this entire province. Guess who has the lowest housing starts? It’s his riding of Guelph. But this gets even better.

Interjections.

Hon. Doug Ford: This even gets better. The member didn’t stand up—and we have a housing crisis for students at the University of Guelph. On the University of Guelph’s property—guess what? They voted it down. They won’t even give the kids—and he was in favour of it. That is terrible.

He talks a good game—

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

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order.

Stop the clock.

The government side will come to order.

Start the clock.

The next question.

Public safety

Mrs. Daisy Wai: My question is for the Solicitor General. My constituents in Richmond Hill are deeply concerned about the safety of our neighbourhoods. They are concerned about increased levels of crime. This is a serious issue, impacting many of our communities, especially in the GTA.

People should not be afraid to use public transit, commute to work, or go shopping.

Public safety needs to be a priority because it affects all of us in our daily lives and is important for ensuring strong and prosperous neighbourhoods.

People are looking to our government for leadership and solutions to get crime under control.

Can the Solicitor General please explain what actions our government is taking to address crime in our province?

Hon. Michael S. Kerzner: I want to thank my colleague and wish her a very happy birthday.

Mr. Speaker, the member is absolutely correct; public safety must be the centre point of our attention, as urgent change is needed.

Two weeks ago, as members will remember, this House came together in voting for a motion to call on the federal government to implement meaningful bail reform. I can assure this House that our government is looking forward to working with our federal counterparts, including Minister Mendicino, and we are ready to assist in any way we can to see critical change and reform as soon as possible. This matter cannot wait, and this House sent a strong message that signalled with our unanimous vote.

Maintaining law and order is impossible without our police services. The men and women in uniform who put their lives on the line need our support, and we will always have their backs.

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

Mrs. Daisy Wai: Thank you to the Solicitor General for that response. On behalf of my community in Richmond Hill, it is great to hear that the government is continuing to support our police services. This goes a long way in keeping Ontario safe.

However, for the people of our province, there are other issues that relate to public safety and crime prevention. The first concern is about how our police are tackling large-scale criminal activity, and the second is about the importance of bail reform policies. One of my birthday wishes is to have that bail reform under control.

Can the Solicitor General please explain how the important issue of bail reform will benefit Ontario?

Hon. Michael S. Kerzner: Just last month, York Regional Police, Toronto police, the OPP, and Durham police, working collaboratively with our federal government and the US government, held a successful operation they called Moneypenny. Approximately—and this is incredible—1.5 kilos of fentanyl and carfentanil were seized. In addition, 86 illegal guns were seized.

We know that the majority of those firearms were smuggled into Canada from the US and sold illegally—and this is not new. That’s why we’re calling for greater border protection.

As a result of Operation Moneypenny, some offenders were charged with failure to comply in the courts, and that’s why we need bail reform, as the member said.

Our message to the people of Ontario is simple: The safety of Ontarians is always our highest priority.

School facilities

Ms. Doly Begum: I’m glad to see that my students from Scarborough Southwest are here today.

My question is to the Minister of Education.

Schools in Scarborough Southwest are literally falling apart, and it is unacceptable that, despite the urgent facility needs identified by schools and school boards, our children are forced to learn in poorly equipped classrooms.

Speaker, this government claims to be making historic investments while simultaneously committing less than inflation and underspending their education budget by hundreds of millions of dollars.

My question is, how will this government address the backlog of repairs that we have across the province and ensure that our children are in safe and well-equipped classrooms?

Hon. Stephen Lecce: I do appreciate the question from the member opposite.

I’m working with the Minister of Infrastructure to accelerate building schools in this province. We brought forth legislation designed to help fix the problem cited, which is, there are too many schools that need repair and it takes too long to get it done. In this bill, we’re going to accelerate the approval process. We’re going to allow joint-use projects with community partners, to build better recreational facilities for our kids.

In the budget, $14 billion is committed over the next decade to build new schools—$550 million this year alone.

And the Auditor General has requested and recommended to government to invest 2.5% of our budget in maintenance and renewal in the GSN. We have done that. We are providing that stability and those funding guarantees to school boards.

We know there is much more to do.

If the members opposite want to improve the state of schools, they will vote for the Better Schools and Student Outcomes Act to ensure we deliver schools quicker and get things done for the children of this province.

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

Ms. Doly Begum: I invite the minister to come to my riding and see some of the conditions. Some of the school repair is the same amount as actually building an entire school itself.

Speaker, not only are our schools crumbling, but the government’s continued underfunding of our education system is leading to cuts in teachers and education workers. These cuts have resulted in oversized classrooms, inadequate specialized learning programs, and a lack of mental health support. This has a direct and detrimental impact on our children’s education.

So my question is, again, will this government provide our children with the support that they need, instead of putting pressure on our already underfunded education system?

Hon. Stephen Lecce: Speaker, I am very proud that, because of the strong leadership of members from Scarborough from our government, we are building new schools in that community, after years of repair backlog. In addition to that, we’re building subways in Scarborough and renewing long-term care in hospitals. We’re investing across the board to give hope to families in Scarborough.

When it comes to education, just this morning, the Ontario Human Rights Commission issued a statement on the legislation posted. They said, “The OHRC is pleased to read that the government of Ontario is committed to overhauling the language curriculum and screening all young children, as recommended in its #RightToRead report.”

We have strong support from Dyslexia Canada, from special education families, and from the parent associations of Ontario—demanding that we lift standards and we do better for kids.

We just announced a $690-million increase—the entire Ministry of Education budget. When you compare the peak of spending under Premier Wynne, it’s 27% higher.

We are investing more, we are expecting more for children in this province, and we’re going to continue to stand up for families in Ontario.

Agri-food industry

Mr. Hardeep Singh Grewal: Ontario’s food processing industry is a core pillar of our province’s economic success and sustainability. And in my riding of Brampton East, they are some of our largest employers, with companies like Sierra Processing, Sofina Foods, and Maple Leaf Foods bringing high-quality food to our plates every single day. The success of Ontario is tied to the success of these companies and their employees. Ensuring that we enable success is an important priority.

Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs.

Could the minister please explain how the government is supporting food-processing businesses in my riding?

Hon. Lisa M. Thompson: I’m very pleased to share with the House today that Ontario is Canada’s food hub when it comes to processing.

The member from Brampton East is absolutely right; we have amazing food processors right in his home riding—and I appreciate the question very much.

Just recently, we hosted a food summit with over 200 participants. At that summit, we celebrated good work that our governmen