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

July 13, 2020

42nd 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 2020-Jul-13 vol. A (PDF)

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Monday 13 July 2020 Lundi 13 juillet 2020

Notices of reasoned amendments

Members’ Statements

June 27 Miracle Project

Roberta Battaglia

Nurses

COVID-19 response

Tenant protection

Public space

Hospital funding

Black July

Economic reopening and recovery

Landfill

Question Period

Education

Long-term care

COVID-19

Manufacturing sector

Government contracts

Provincial parks

Anti-racism activities

Women’s issues

Anti-racism activities

Public transit

COVID-19

Tourism and hospitality industry

Economic reopening and recovery

Sport fishing

Child care

Deferred Votes

Time allocation

Reports by Committees

Standing Committee on Finance and Economic Affairs

Petitions

Climate change

Justices of the peace

Justices of the peace

Justices of the peace

Justices of the peace

Orders of the Day

Extension of emergency declaration

Select Committee on Emergency Management Oversight

Legislative Assembly Amendment Act, 2020 / Loi de 2020 modifiant la

Loi sur l’Assemblée législative

Rebuilding Consumer Confidence Act, 2020 / Loi de 2020 visant à rétablir la confiance chez les consommateurs

The House met at 1015.

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

Prayers.

Notices of reasoned amendments

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I beg to inform the House that, pursuant to standing order 74(b), the member for Timmins has notified the Clerk of his intention to file notice of a reasoned amendment to the motion for second reading of Bill 197,

An Act to amend various statutes in response to COVID-19 and to enact, amend and repeal various statutes. The order for second reading of Bill 197 may therefore not be called today.

I beg to inform the House that, pursuant to standing order 74(c), the member for Timmins has filed with the Clerk a reasoned amendment to the motion for second reading of Bill 195,

An Act to enact the Reopening Ontario (A Flexible Response to COVID-19) Act, 2020. The order for second reading of Bill 195 may therefore not be called today.

Members’ Statements

June 27 Miracle Project

Mr. Percy Hatfield: I stand in the House today to say: I believe in miracles. We just had one in Windsor-Essex county. It’s known as the June 27 Miracle. Organizers ask residents to help our 15 food banks with donations of non-perishable foods. More than 10,000 volunteers pitched in to help collect the donations. My wife, Gale, and I filled our Windsor-built Grand Caravan by collecting food just from our own neighbourhood. Together, during the June 27 Miracle, volunteers collected 20,020,500 pounds of food. That’s 916,500 kilograms, or 916.5 metric tons. That’s about three and a half times the world record for one-day donations. That’s enough food to feed 30,000 families for a year.

This comes, Speaker, during a global pandemic when thousands of people are out of work and when donating to charities is a challenge for many and an impossibility for some. Once again, the people in Windsor and Essex county have shown their generous spirit and their sense of looking after one another and demonstrated that we truly are all in this together. Congratulations to everyone in Leamington, Kingsville, Essex, Lakeshore, Amherstburg, LaSalle, Tecumseh and Windsor for proving to the world that records are made to be broken and miracles do indeed happen.

Roberta Battaglia

Mr. Rudy Cuzzetto: A month ago, a local 10-year-old singer, Roberta Battaglia, gave the performance of her life at America’s Got Talent. She sang the song by Lady Gaga and Bradley Cooper, the Oscar-winning theme song Shallow, appropriately enough from the movie A Star is Born. Another star was born that night when Sofia Vergara hit the golden buzzer, sending Roberta to the live semi-final show in Hollywood.

For now, though, Roberta says that the hardest part about COVID-19 has been staying away from her family and friends. So on June 28, we organized a surprise drive-by parade for her at the Mississauga Canoe Club in Port Credit. Over 100 cars and hundreds of people joined to salute Roberta. I want to thank my friends Carmela Liparoti and Frank Trevisan from the Mississauga Italian Canadian Benevolent Association for co-hosting the event and everyone for joining us, including the Associate Minister of Mental Health and Addictions, the Peel Regional Police, who led the parade, and the mayor.

When Roberta said she has been bullied in the past, Simon Cowell told her, “Bullies are always threatened by talented people.” The way you beat them is to be “happy and successful.”

I know all members of this House will join me in cheering for Roberta in Hollywood. I wish her happiness and success wherever she goes next.

Nurses

Mr. Terence Kernaghan: Nurses have been working at all hours of the day to battle COVID-19. They are truly heroes. But instead of spending their few free hours with loved ones, London nurses have had to protest this government’s unfair Bill 124.

Last month, I attended a protest organized by Allison Mckeen and Rebecca Jesney, where London nurses told me loud and clear that they want action, not empty words from this government. They’re tired of the previous Liberal government and how this current government is denying them a raise that keeps up with inflation. They have been waiting for more than 10 years, Speaker.

Allison and Rebecca wrote to me, stating, “Bill 124 has left nurses feeling disenfranchised, undervalued and under-appreciated.” Bill 124 “emphasizes the blatant pay inequity and gender inequality among public sectors. The future of nursing depends on our profession being recognized as educated professionals, compensated as equals and treated fairly. Your Ontario nurses deserve better.” I couldn’t agree more.

Speaker, I join their call to repeal Bill 124, and I am proud to stand shoulder to shoulder with Ontario’s nurses in their fight for fair wages. It’s time for this government to step up and do the same.

COVID-19 response

Ms. Amy Fee: Over the past few months, we as Ontarians have faced an unprecedented challenge in the form of the COVID-19 pandemic. The impacts of this virus have been wide-reaching and they have been felt by all Ontarians. But through all of this, we can point to bright spots as we see our communities coming together, businesses retooling to make PPE, front-line workers maintaining critical supply chains, and health care workers providing world-class care for those who need it most.

For me, one local constituent really stands out: veteran Jim McLean. He told me the story of his daughter Tina’s battle with COVID-19 while she was pregnant. It was a horrible situation that Jim, though, has used as motivation for good. He has put together a run across southern Ontario this week with his PTSD service dog, Lucky, and his wife, Kathy. They’re running together to raise funds for COVID research at the University of Guelph. Tina, who spent eight days on life support, and her son, Lynx, survived.

It is situations like this that really highlight what we as a community can do in times of hardship. Jim’s story has shaped my perspective on the pandemic and has drawn my attention to the good that can come from these challenging times as we all come together to do what we can do to defeat this virus.

Tenant protection

Ms. Suze Morrison: Despite the temporary ban on eviction hearings in Ontario, landlords have been continuing to hand out eviction notices to their tenants. They’re getting in line so that they can toss their tenants out as soon as the province flips the switch and allows for eviction hearings to begin.

Last week, the province took the first steps to do just that. The court order temporarily halting evictions in Ontario was amended, and evictions can now resume across the province beginning in the month following the end of the state of emergency. If the Premier lifts the state of emergency in the coming weeks, COVID evictions could begin as early as August 1. But Speaker, folks who have lost their jobs and their income as a result of the pandemic are no more able to pay the months of back rent they owe than they are today.

The Conservative government has done absolutely nothing to protect tenants during this unprecedented emergency. Not only have they not provided any meaningful relief, like the rent subsidy program that the NDP has been calling for, but they’ve used the cover of COVID-19 to fast-track an eviction bill that will make it easier and quicker for landlords to kick out their tenants.

Is it the Premier’s intention to preside over the largest mass eviction and tenant displacement in this province’s history, and where does he expect those tenants to go? So to the Premier: Will you withdraw Bill 184, stop COVID evictions and implement the rent subsidy program that, as the NDP, we have been calling for since the start of COVID-19? That is what tenants need to survive this emergency.

Public space

Mr. Mike Schreiner: I rise today to give a shout-out to the Downtown Guelph Business Association, Mayor Cam Guthrie, councillors and Guelph city staff for implementing a plan to close downtown streets so that restaurants can open to expand outdoor seating into a new dining district.

Downtown Guelph is coming back to life. People are making an extra effort to support local businesses. I’m excited to see friends and family socializing together safely, respecting physical distancing while socializing in the street. It is a reminder that streets are for people and community, not just for moving and storing cars.

As we emerge from the lockdown, going back to business as usual will not work. Let’s build back better. Let’s reimagine public space, making it people-centric instead of car-centric. Speaker, our kids need more space to play safely. People need more space to walk and ride safely. Businesses need more space to reopen safely. Instead of bulldozing the places we love to build more highways, let’s make our streets safe and accessible for everyone to live, work, play and shop local, supporting our local businesses in building stronger communities. I just want to say thank you to Guelph for taking the first step in making this happen.

Hospital funding

Mr. David Piccini: I rise today to thank my two local hospitals in Northumberland–Peterborough South: Northumberland Hills Hospital and Campbellford Memorial Hospital.

When I was first elected, I got a tour of both hospitals. One of the first issues both CEOs raised with me was the medium-sized hospital funding formula, which affected our medium-sized hospitals and also our small hospitals in rural Ontario.

You hope to never truly need a hospital, but in the case of emergencies, they’re there. They were there when encountering rugby accidents, soccer accidents for me, and, in the more serious case, they were there to support my mum when we got the very difficult news that she had cancer.

I’d like to thank the teams at both hospitals. These hospitals are the fabric that bind rural Ontario. The leadership—Linda Davis, CEO of NHH, and Varouj Eskedjian, CEO of Campbellford Memorial Hospital. I’d like to thank the board, the front-line health care professionals, the staff and the countless volunteers for the work they did in advocating to truly address the historical underfunding of their hospitals. Mr. Speaker, I’m proud to say that we’ve addressed those funding inequities.

Last week, I was joined by Premier Ford and Minister Elliott to address that, and to announce a close to 20% increase in funding for NHH and close to 7% for Campbellford Memorial Hospital.

Again, I would like to thank the staff, the hard-working front-line workers, and all of the people in my community who support our hospitals.

Black July

Mr. Gurratan Singh: July 1983, also known as Black July, is a period of pain for Tamils in Canada and across the world. In the capital of a country that was supposed to keep them safe, voters lists were used to target Tamil people and burn them alive in the streets. Thousands were killed and thousands more were displaced. It was a clear sign from the Sri Lankan government that they didn’t just want to suppress the Tamil people; they wanted to eliminate them.

Since Black July, we have seen a clear campaign of genocide carried out by the Sri Lankan government against the Tamil people. For years, Tamils were picked up in white vans and disappeared, murdered in secret. Even children were killed in the bombing of an orphanage in Chenocolai, and thousands were killed in the genocide of the Mullivaikkal massacre.

Even today, Tamils are still not safe, as they face a far more insidious form of structural violence that targets them politically, socially and culturally. Yet, despite all this despair, when I see the Tamil community in Canada, all I see is strength—a resilient community that stands tall and holds their heads high in spite of all this violence, that continues their pursuit of justice.

That’s why I ask for all Canadians and all members of this House to stand and support the Tamil people and their pursuit for justice, so that together we may say: Let’s never forget Black July. Vanakkam.

Economic reopening and recovery

Ms. Donna Skelly: I’m so pleased to rise today to applaud the efforts of entrepreneurs in this province as they get back on track following the COVID shutdown. Ontario businesses sacrificed a lot when they closed their doors to bolster the fight against the deadly coronavirus. Tourism and hospitality sectors were devastated.

Currently, I’m serving on the Standing Committee on Finance and Economic Affairs, and we have been hearing from many stakeholders whose livelihoods have been threatened by the pandemic. Despite the bleak outlook, many entrepreneurs see optimism and hope for the future. They know our government is committed to doing everything it can to help struggling businesses recover. Our Premier is determined to reduce red tape, allowing businesses to function without needless government regulations.

Restaurateurs in my hometown of Hamilton took the lead on opening outdoor dining districts. Our government supported them by loosening regulations to permit alcohol to be served in public spaces. And our government issued an emergency order allowing municipalities to quickly pass temporary bylaws to create, extend and cover outdoor dining areas. The patio approval process has been reduced from weeks to days, and businesses are taking advantage of it. So far in Hamilton, almost 120 patio applications have been received, and almost all will be approved.

Entrepreneurs have taken up the challenge to find creative ways to conduct business in the face of this COVID crisis. Businesses are crucial to keeping and creating jobs, and I am proud to say that our Premier and our government have helped navigate through this economic storm.

Landfill

Mr. Will Bouma: Last week, our government introduced Bill 197, the COVID-19 Economic Recovery Act, a bill that is focused on strengthening communities and creating opportunity for people in every region of the province.

An important part of the proposed legislation, and one that’s received a lot of support in my riding of Brantford–Brant was the municipal-say-in-landfill piece, which gives municipalities more say in the projects that are being proposed in their own communities. For decades, municipalities across Ontario had projects forced into their backyards, and they were often never even asked if they were willing to host such projects. Requiring municipal support in the landfill approval process is an important step in helping to ensure that the municipalities that are most directly impacted by the siting of a new, large landfill have a say on such an important matter.

There have been over 140 municipalities that have passed motions seeking legislation giving towns and cities the authority to approve the locations for new landfill sites, and I am proud to be part of a government that has listened to these communities across the province.

This proposal is a balanced approach that gives local municipalities more say in landfill approvals while providing more certainty for landfill applicants, and ensures sufficient landfill capacity in the province.

I want to thank the Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks for moving forward on this proposal and following through with another commitment in the Made-in-Ontario Environment Plan.

Question Period

Education

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My first question this morning is to the Premier. Media reports today that the Premier will be announcing plans for stage 3 reopening of some businesses today, but parents are still waiting for news that this government is committed to a full, five-day-a-week reopening of our schools and adequate child care spaces. Without a plan to fully reopen schools and child care centres, you don’t have a plan to reopen the economy—at least, not for thousands of working women who rely on child care and schools to ensure that they can actually get to work.

Will the government be announcing those plans today?

Hon. Doug Ford: I can’t comment on what our news conference is going to be about right now, but it’s going to be an exciting news conference, like it is every single day, bringing people up to date on where we’re going and showing them how our economy is moving forward, making sure that we keep the health and safety of not only families but students our number one concern, making sure that they go back, when they do go back, to a safe environment.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: People can’t go back to work unless their kids are back in school and back in child care.

While the Premier spent last week ignoring pleas from parents frustrated by the lack of plans for September, school boards across the province spent their last week scrambling to try to put a school year together and calling on the Premier to reverse his decision to send kids back to school part-time this fall.

In Toronto, the TDSB said the Conservatives’ hybrid plan “places a tremendous burden on parents and caregivers—and, in particular, women, families with young children and low-income families, and stands to further jeopardize the economic recovery.”

Will the Premier step up with a real plan so parents don’t have to choose between their jobs and their kids?

Hon. Doug Ford: Through the best advice that we have from the chief medical officers right across this province, we decided to let each school board make a decision, and we gave them three different criteria that they can work with.

To support the school boards, we’re making the largest investment in education in Ontario’s history. It’s $25 billion—that’s over $730 million from last year. We’re increasing student funding by over $250. Every single school board will see an increase in funding that they haven’t seen in many, many years.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: There used to be a principle in the province of Ontario where no matter where a child lives, they would have access to quality public education that’s pretty equal around the province. It sounds like the Premier is abandoning that theory.

In Ottawa, trustees have voted to send kids back five days a week after parents raised concerns that the Ford government’s non-plan would only make things much, much worse. Parents said the scheme was unfair and kids said that “a Google meeting once a week” isn’t an education. Parents have said loud and clear that you cannot expect parents to work and be teachers.

So back to the Premier: Ontario’s medical officers of health, school boards, parents, teachers, students and child care operators are all calling on this government to do better. Where is the plan to reopen schools and child care centres in our province?

Hon. Doug Ford: Again, Mr. Speaker, we must be speaking to two different groups. We usually are speaking to two different groups. I’m speaking to all the people of the province. I’m not too sure who the Leader of the Opposition is speaking to, but what I’m hearing from parents is that it’s a good plan. What I’m hearing from school board trustees is, ‘Thank you for giving us the option, rather than forcing options down our back.”

Every jurisdiction is a little different, and what applies up in Kenora doesn’t necessarily apply in Hamilton or in Toronto. We’re giving them the flexibility to make a plan and work with the school boards, making sure they work with the parents and community organizations. We’re going to move forward in September and keep the kids safe. That’s our number one priority.

Long-term care

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My next question is also to the Premier, but I have to say that even employers are very, very worried about this government’s lack of a plan and lack of funding for getting schools back up and running for our kids.

Last week, the Premier unveiled a 150-page omnibus bill and claimed it was actually a response to COVID-19. The bill will do a great deal for developers who donate to the PC Party, but it doesn’t do anything for families waiting for child care. It isn’t a plan to reopen the schools or help municipalities that are struggling with cuts. Most shockingly, it fails to even mention—it doesn’t even mention once—long-term care.

The Premier has often said that long-term care is an urgent priority. Why has it fallen off the priority list all of a sudden?

Hon. Doug Ford: I’m a little shocked because this is the first time the Leader of the Opposition has even cared about employers or small businesses. They vote against every single bill that we put forward for small businesses, making sure that they stay afloat. I’m just a little concerned about that, Mr. Speaker.

We have a great plan. Endless small businesses, medium and large businesses I talk to, there’s one word I get, and that’s “thank you”: Thank you for working with us. Thank you for moving the province forward, and thank you for not being like the US, opening it right up—as you saw in Florida, 15,000 cases.

We’re going too make sure we’re responsible and thoughtful when we reopen.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Supplementary?

Ms. Andrea Horwath: I see, Speaker, that the Premier decided to dodge the long-term-care piece of that question, so I’m going to continue in that vein.

The Premier spent weeks claiming that urgent changes are needed in long-term care. That’s what he claimed. Yet last week he tabled a 150-page bill in this Legislature and he didn’t table a single change in long-term care within that bill.

For years, families and front-line workers have proposed, for example, a minimum standard of four hours of long-term care for every resident. It’s a simple measure that would help ensure that residents are actually getting the attention they need and deserve. Why was that not in the bill?

Hon. Doug Ford: Through you, Mr. Speaker, I find it so rich, so ironic, hearing this from the Leader of the Opposition and the previous government. They did absolutely nothing. They opened up a little over 600 long-term care beds over—what was it?—a 15-year period.

When it comes to air conditioning, Mr. Speaker, you know something? The Leader of the Opposition has been down here since 2009, 11 years—not one single word about air conditioning.

You know something? Granted, there are all sorts of things we think of and certain things we didn’t think of, and I want to thank the reporter from CBC for bringing it to our attention because now we don’t have to worry about moving forward as we invest into air conditioning, not just in common areas but in each individual room. Just imagine sitting there sweltering, and they sat around for 11 years doing absolutely nothing—zip, zero, zilch, nothing.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Well, Speaker, the Premier will need to correct his record because I’ve been here since 2004. In 2006, I was advocating for air conditioning in long-term care. In 2007, I raised it right here in the Legislature, advocating for air conditioning in long-term care. Speaker, the Premier needs to do his homework, unfortunately, again.

Last week, he feigned absolute outrage at the lack of air conditioning in long-term-care homes. Over a decade ago, in hearings on the Long-Term Care Homes Act, seniors demanded that air conditioning in all long-term-care facilities be made the law. I told the Premier last week that we could pass that legislation immediately. We could still do that today, setting that standard.

The Premier found space to make sure that his well-connected developers could get quick approval for their projects in that omnibus bill last week, but seniors in long-term care saw zilch, zippo, nothing from the Premier. Why?

Hon. Doug Ford: Well, you know something? I stand to be corrected. I apologize. It wasn’t that the Leader of the Opposition did nothing for 11 years; she did nothing for 16 years, so I apologize for that. I’m pretty good at math, too, but I should have figured that out.

What we did do, Mr. Speaker, is put $243 million into long-term care immediately. We’re going to put more money into long-term care than this province has ever seen—ever. We’re going to build more homes, more beds, than this province has ever seen. There’s one thing to face a crisis, Mr. Speaker; there’s another thing to act on a crisis, and our government is acting on a crisis.

COVID-19

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My next question is also for the Premier. This weekend, I had a chance to visit the Windsor-Essex region and hear directly from people about the challenges that they’ve been facing during this pandemic. While the Premier has been claiming that he put an all-hands-on-deck approach to help the region when it comes to COVID-19 outbreaks amongst migrant workers in the region, late last week the local mayors were very clear, Speaker: Efforts are uncoordinated and chaotic, they said. The Premier says that he has put that all-hands-on-deck approach in place; how come the left hand doesn’t know what the right hand is doing?

Hon. Doug Ford: Without naming names about the mayors—they’re great mayors down there and in constant communication. One mayor told me that they don’t even have time for the NDP because they haven’t done anything—nothing, zero. They don’t even want to visit them. So what does that say?

But I do look forward to going down there Thursday, Mr. Speaker, meeting the farmers, meeting the workers, meeting the small business owners right across Kingsville and Leamington. Again, I have a phenomenal relationship with both mayors down there. We’ll have more comments when I come back from the little tour we’re having of Leamington on Thursday. Hopefully I’ll get a few pounds cut off the top of my hair here.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Well, Speaker, talk is cheap. In other provinces, provincial governments have shown leadership to get outbreaks on farms under control and prevent them from actually happening in the first place. But in Ontario, we’ve seen local governments left scrambling to fill the gaps, and a complete lack of coordination, because this Premier and his team did not step up to the challenge.

As of Monday, 19 of over 170 farms in the Windsor-Essex area have completed the on-site testing, and the Premier seems more interested in blaming migrant workers—wrongfully claiming that they’re avoiding tests—than in actually solving the problems. When will the Premier get his act into gear and show some leadership on this issue?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Minister of Labour, Training and Skills Development.

Hon. Monte McNaughton: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I think that this is a great opportunity to thank all of the people in Ontario—14.5 million people—that have come together every single day to work to defeat COVID-19. We’ve got a long way to go obviously, but with everyone working together, we’re going to get there.

When it comes to Kingsville and Leamington, we just have to thank all of those small businesses. Thankfully, because they’ve worked together, they’ve now moved to stage 2. And, Mr. Speaker, we can’t forget the great news that the people of Ontario heard. Obviously we have a long way to go, but 378,000 jobs were created in Ontario in the month of June. That’s good news for Kingsville and Leamington. That’s good news for every person in the province of Ontario.

Manufacturing sector

Mr. Rudy Cuzzetto: My question is for the Premier. At the beginning of the global pandemic, every jurisdiction in the world was left scrambling for critical PPE and health supplies. Canada was in a desperate struggle to import supplies we needed from China, the US and other countries. Back in April, Premier, you said that this province would never be left in this situation again. We would never be left at the mercy of other countries and other leaders for health equipment or any other supplies because Ontario is a manufacturing powerhouse.

Having worked at Ford Motor Co. of Canada for 31 years, I got involved in politics because of what was done to the manufacturing sector in Ontario. Speaker, can the Premier share about the success of Ontario’s manufacturing turnaround?

Hon. Doug Ford: I thank the great member from Mississauga–Lakeshore for the question. Yes, I did say that. Yes, we’re in that position now, Mr. Speaker. Just shortly, probably about three months—a little over three months—since we called the manufacturers of Ontario to come together and support the people of Ontario, that’s exactly what they did. They stepped up. Before, we didn’t have one manufacturer of masks; now we have 23 companies bidding on surgical masks and we have numerous companies bidding on the N95 masks.

We have produced and procured over 26 million gowns, 175 million surgical gloves, 123 million masks, four million face shields and over 10,000 ventilators. That’s all in less than three months.

It’s an amazing story. It’s not the government’s story; it’s the people’s story. It’s about the great manufacturers here in Ontario. We can build anything here in Ontario, Mr. Speaker.

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

Mr. Rudy Cuzzetto: My question is back to the Premier. Our manufacturing sector generates $300 billion alone and over 80% of export worldwide. We are a titan of industry, and I know that every Ontarian is proud of our great business.

Last Friday, job numbers brought some great news for our constituents and the people of the province: 378,000 jobs were added to Ontario’s economy in June. That’s 378,000 more people back at work, and a paycheque at home. We saw 66,000 more jobs in manufacturing and 34,000 more jobs in construction, as we recover from the worst economic downturn in our lifetime, as we fight to get every Ontarian back to their feet. Now more than ever, we need to support Ontario business and manufacturers.

Speaker, can the Premier share with the Legislature what our government is doing to promote Ontario’s businesses and Ontario manufacturers once again?

Hon. Doug Ford: I want to thank the member. Last Friday, with CME, we put forward an initiative that recognized the made-in-Ontario, made-in-Canada campaign. We’re moving forward.

It’s great, Mr. Speaker, to hear that 378,000 people are back to work, but we have a long way to go as a province to get everyone back to work. But I’ve always said, we’re a manufacturing might here in North America. We do $390 billion a year in two-way trade with the US and Canada as a whole. We’re their number one customer in the world. We buy more than China, Japan and UK combined—absolutely, combined. And when we put our minds to it, there’s nothing, nothing in this world, we can’t manufacture right here in Ontario.

Government contracts

Mr. Taras Natyshak: My question is to the Premier. The infections of COVID-19 in Essex county and Chatham-Kent–Leamington are nothing less than alarming. Hundreds of migrant workers have fallen ill, and tragically, we have had several fatalities. Our collective sympathies go to the families of those workers and the loved ones of those workers.

But instead of ramping up testing to get the infections under control in our community, the mobile testing for farm workers has been handed over to a private company with an interesting connection to the PC Party. It’s none other than the former executive director of the PC caucus, Jeff Silverstein, a long-time political ally.

Why is the Premier so willing to contract out vital health services to friends of PC Party insiders?

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

Hon. Christine Elliott: Thank you very much for the question. But I can assure you that there has been rapidly expanded testing, and coordinated testing being done, in the Windsor-Essex area with the federal government, with the provincial government and with the local governments, with the mayors, with the public health units. It expanded very rapidly.

For those workers who were found to have COVID, they were congregated together in a place that was safe for them, and they were being visited by health professionals, nurses or nurse practitioners before they were able to go to work, if they were asymptomatic. If they were symptomatic, of course, they received the necessary medical attention.

Far from ignoring the situation, we have actually gathered together. We’ve put all of our forces together, worked together to make sure that everybody can be protected, and that is every single migrant worker in the entire area.

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

Mr. Taras Natyshak: Thanks to the Minister of Health, but that is not the message that’s coming out of our community, based on the press conference by regional leadership, municipal leadership and public health officials.

Ontarians deserve to know if this contract was sole-sourced and how much it’s worth, and they deserve to know how much the Premier’s former executive director of caucus, the one who helped him launch the fake news platform Ontario News Now, was involved. Public servants with years of training in public health could have easily done this work, but the Premier puts ideology ahead of the public, even during this pandemic. This testing was needed months ago, and the Premier only took action when an insider showed up to get a slice of the pie.

Why did the Premier contract out vital testing of the agriculture sector, and will he table all relevant information about the contract today?

Hon. Christine Elliott: The Premier is putting the health of every person in Ontario front and centre. That’s what’s most important. That’s what he has dedicated his resources to, what we are dedicating our resources to. We’ve got the Ministry of Labour, the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs working together to contain this, sending in the teams, opening up assessment centres, having mobile testing—whatever is going to fit well with the operations that are going on there, because we know they’re active farm operations.

We want to make sure they can continue their work, so we are working with the farm owners to make sure that we can get in and make sure that all of the workers are tested. That’s important for their health and safety. If they’re asymptomatic and positive, then they will be contained in a separate area. They will not go back to work until they have been assessed by a medical assessor. And if they are symptomatic and need help, we are sending in the public health units to make sure that they get the care they need.

We want to make sure that the entire area is free of COVID as soon as possible in the near future, for everyone’s health and safety. That is what we’re working toward, that’s what the Premier is diligently working toward and that’s what—

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

The next question.

Provincial parks

Mr. Jim Wilson: My question is for the Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks. The Nancy Island Historic Site in Wasaga Beach is closed this season after having suffered extensive damage due to flooding, but the government has also shut the visitor information centre.

This facility is not on the island. It’s on dry land, on the mainland, adjacent to Nancy Island. The centre is not exclusively under the jurisdiction of the provincial government, as the minister knows. It’s a partnership between Ontario Parks, the town of Wasaga Beach, South Georgian Bay Tourism and the Wasaga Beach Chamber of Commerce, and it is staffed by the Friends of Nancy Island, the charitable organization dedicated to furthering educational and interpretive programs.

On behalf of these hard-working and dedicated volunteers, I ask the minister: Will the government reconsider its unilateral decision to shut down the Nancy Island visitor information centre?

Hon. Jeff Yurek: Thanks for the question from the member opposite. Just to put it out there, the safety of all visitors, of all Ontarians, is first and foremost on our minds as we are reopening the parks throughout the province. It’s the top priority.

We will continue to work slowly at reopening all our additional facilities throughout the province and assess our approach to ensure that adjustments are made at the service to ensure that people are remaining safe. It’s going to be based, of course, on the health advice from the Chief Medical Officer of Health.

The Wasaga Beach Welcome Centre, as was mentioned, did not open for 2020 because of COVID-19. But I can assure the member opposite that my ministry is going to be working with stakeholders, the Friends of Nancy Island and Wasaga Beach town to find out a solution for us so we can continue to provide a safe area for folks who are coming to that area and ensure that information services are available for tourists and people visiting.

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

Mr. Jim Wilson: Back to the minister: I hate taking yes for an answer; thank you very much for that answer. As soon as it is safe to do so, please open it. Obviously, it’s important to our businesses. Like the rest of the province, they’ve been hit pretty hard. Wasaga Beach is 100% dependent on tourism.

On that front, I want to thank Minister of Tourism for coming to the north end of my riding a couple of weeks ago. That was a great boost to the tourism industry there. And I want to thank the Minister of Parks for opening up, finally—after eight years under the Liberal government, of fighting with them to open them up—the bathrooms at New Wasaga Beach and Allenwood Beach. You got us new bathrooms with flush toilets and running water, and they closed down the old privy.

Congratulations to the government for being on the bathroom watch. That was fantastic work on behalf of the people of Wasaga Beach.

Hon. Jeff Yurek: To the Legislature: I can say that the member opposite has been such a stalwart champion for the people of his area since 1990. We’re proud that he still maintains part of this Legislature.

But let me tell you, Mr. Speaker: We will continue the Ontario Parks’ gradual reopen, always taking consistency, the safety of the folks in this province as we open up. I’ll just let the member opposite know that Wasaga Beach and area is a prime priority for this province, to ensure that we’re able to support them and their town as they reopen due to COVID-19. Whatever Ontario Parks can do to ensure their support as they bring in more tourists—we will there to support that community and ensure that they are growing and back from COVID-19. I thank the member opposite for that question.

Anti-racism activities

Mr. Kaleed Rasheed: My question is to the Minister of Education. I know full well, watching closely the issues at the Peel District School Board, that within Ontario’s education, there are serious equity issues. That’s why I was proud to see our government take action last week and announce bold new changes to the education system that will help break down barriers for Black, Indigenous and racialized students. Can the minister please tell this House what changes our government is making that will provide all students with an equal opportunity to succeed?

Hon. Stephen Lecce: Thank you to the member for Mississauga-East–Cooksville for his advocacy in this respect.

Speaker, we believe that every student, irrespective of the colour of skin, their faith, heritage, their income or sexual orientation—each and every one of them deserves every opportunity to succeed in this province. The transformational change we’re driving forward will embolden a generation of students to unleash their full potential and dismantle the systemic barriers that have held them back for a generation.

Following a year of consultations, our entire caucus, supported by the parliamentary assistant, has been listening to parents who have asked us for action and who felt ignored for too long. That’s why we’re taking action in the areas of suspension, in destreaming and in professional standards and expectations.

In addition, we are ensuring that, to provide a discrimination-free classroom, the government will be strengthening sanctions for behavioural remarks of a racist nature by an educator by working with the Ontario College of Teachers.

We’ll also be expanding training: mandatory training for education staff and for all elected trustees and senior school board staff in this province to ensure that they are better positioned to support in the areas of human rights, anti-racism and anti-discrimination.

Speaker, we know there is more to do. We’re committed to doing so to get this right for our kids.

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

Mr. Kaleed Rasheed: Thank you to the minister for the answer. I’m glad to hear that our government takes these issues seriously and is taking decisive action to stamp out systemic racism in our schools.

Students deserve an equal opportunity to succeed. To drive this change, I know that we need to support school boards so that they can take on this important work. Can the minister please tell this House how our government is financially supporting boards to get this important work done?

Hon. Stephen Lecce: Thank you again to the member for the question. Speaker, through the Grants for Student Needs we’ve allocated over $40 million to help school boards implement suspension policies in the province, including for the hiring of professional staff and implementation programs to help those educators avoid out-of-school suspensions.

Moreover, Speaker, we’ve dedicated $1 million of the additional ancillary $10-million investment in mental health specifically for mental health supports for racialized kids. That’s in addition to the historic doubling of mental health supports led by this Progressive Conservative government.

In addition, we’re providing $3.5 million for the Black and Indigenous grad program. This provides wraparound supports for students at risk, to help them graduate in the province of Ontario.

Through these measures, we believe that these key investments will ensure a better, more equal outcome of education and will truly unlock the potential of every child in this province.

Women’s issues

Ms. Jill Andrew: The question is to the Premier. The majority of COVID-19 cases have been women. According to the Canadian Women’s Foundation, located in my riding, 90% of nurses are women. Many are Black and racialized. Your “health care heroes” are underpaid, overworked and haven’t seen a dime of their pandemic pay. Some 80% of lone-parent households are women-led and predominantly single-income. Women are largely represented in retail and, as we know, local businesses, both of which were shuttered due to the pandemic and due to the government’s lack of an initial plan with rent relief or even an emergency basic income—nothing came.

Speaker, my question is: Women and other vulnerable Ontarians have been disproportionately impacted by COVID-19. What is this government’s plan to ensure that they’re not left behind during our recovery?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The associate minister with responsibility for children and women’s issues.

Hon. Jill Dunlop: Thank you to the member for that valuable question. We know that when women succeed in society, our economy succeeds. We know that women have been disproportionately affected by the pandemic, both at home and in the workplace.

The labour force data shows that more women have lost their jobs and had hours cut. I, alongside my colleagues, like the Minister of Finance, the Minister of Labour, Training and Skills Development, the Minister of Education and the member from Willowdale, have been meeting with partners from different sectors to get their feedback on what our government can do to better support women. This round table brought together women from across our province to provide feedback on how we can better support women’s economic participation, as well as identify ways to generate savings, stimulate economic growth, create jobs and make life more affordable.

Many jobs in the fields that we looked at are skilled, high-paying, and they offer opportunities for long-term security. We need to work together to make sure that women and girls are aware of the opportunities of the different sectors so that we can help them succeed.

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

Ms. Jill Andrew: Premier, Patricia is a PSW in our riding who contracted COVID-19; she’s one of the 6,181 health care workers who did. Patricia often worked alone on her floor with 24 residents, many of whom died. Her mental health is waning. Patricia said she believes this government didn’t prioritize her or many PSWs because they are primarily racialized and women.

Speaker, Ontario’s COVID-19 recovery must include economic security for women. Too many women, from the arts to health care, are cobbling together to make ends meet. Our economic recovery must include healthy and safe workplaces for women. It must be include child care options for families so women can actually get back to work with peace of mind.

My question is: Last year, I tabled a motion asking this government to adopt an intersectional gender equity strategy which would see all bills, motions, budgets and regulations introduced. Will this government adopt my motion today to ensure that Ontario’s COVID-19 recovery plan is fully accountable to women and underserved communities?

Hon. Jill Dunlop: Thank you to the member for the question. Women’s earnings are crucial to the well-being and financial stability of their families, which is why we need to have broader conversations about child care in this province. We know that access to high-quality child care is a key lever to supporting women’s labour force participation, getting more women to work full-time and helping women to transition into better jobs.

The Minister of Education and I have been working hard on this issue together. He and I were able to host a joint round table focused on the impact of child care on women’s economic participation. We spoke with women and sector leaders on what our government can do to better support women with families and children in this province.

As our government continues to push forward policies that make Ontario open for business and open for jobs during the recovery, we are working hard to make sure we are promoting women and other minorities.

Anti-racism activities

Mr. Michael Coteau: My question is to the minister responsible for anti-racism. Minister, your government has agreed that systemic racism exists and has expressed a commitment to ending it. However, this government has been completely silent on how racialized Ontarians have taken the hardest hit, statistically, to their finances during this pandemic.

As the minister knows, having the responsibility for the Anti-Racism Directorate means working with other ministries to apply a race-based lens to government policy. Some communities in Ontario have been disproportionately impacted by COVID-19 when compared to others. So, Minister, can you please tell this House if you’ve done an initial assessment on the impact of COVID-19 on racialized communities, and if so, have you reached out and connected with these groups? And finally, have you started to work with other ministries, especially the minister responsible for the economic recovery, on a government response?

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The Solicitor General.

Hon. Sylvia Jones: Thank you for the question. I don’t think that there’s any doubt that many, many parts of our society have been impacted greatly by the COVID-19 pandemic, but I can assure you that the Anti-Racism Directorate and my ministry have been working constantly since I was appointed with other ministries. We understand that this is not an Anti-Racism Directorate responsibility; it’s not a Solicitor General responsibility; it is a government-wide, society responsibility.

To that point, I will share a few examples of how the ARD’s recent work has included mediated partnerships between the Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board and the Hamilton Centre for Civic Inclusion to support Black youth in the Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board. It shows that when the Anti-Racism Directorate does their job well, we get excellent results in our communities. We will continue to do that, and I’m proud, frankly, of the work that they’ve been doing.

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

Mr. Michael Coteau: I think the minister has completely missed the mark on this question. My question was to ask if she has an understanding that the Anti-Racism Directorate’s true intention was to use a race-based lens to establish an understanding of who is hit the hardest during the COVID-19 challenges that we have.

There was a poll done last week commissioned by the TD Bank that determined that Canadians surveyed between 18 and 34 have experienced or foresee experiencing unemployment and reduced hours as a result of the pandemic when compared to 38% of people above 55. More specifically, roughly 70% of Filipino, 65% of South Asian and 64% of Black Canadians expect to face unemployment or reduced hours over the next few months because of COVID-19, compared to just 50% of the general population.

So, back to the minister: Minister, can you share with this House—and be specific; this is about the economic recovery during COVID-19—what your plan is to mitigate some of these disparities affecting the hardest-hit communities, racialized communities here in Ontario?

Hon. Sylvia Jones: The only person who has missed the mark is the member opposite asking the question. We have made a very measured approach to ensure that, as we return back to opening up our economy, opening up our communities, we make sure we do it in a measured and safe way.

Mr. Michael Coteau: One example.

Hon. Sylvia Jones: The member opposite would like some specific examples. I am happy to share them:

—supported Toronto District School Board and Children’s Aid Society of Toronto to address anti-Black racism in their respective organizations; and

—supported Durham District School Board with developing anti-Black racism training for their kindergarten teachers;

—developing a cutting-edge applied learning program to equip members of the OPS, Ontario public service, with the anti-racism knowledge, skills and tools needed to build a public service that is more inclusive, equitable and responsive.

Again I reiterate: I am proud of the work that the Anti-Racism Directorate continues to do across all ministries, including the economic ministries.

Public transit

Mrs. Daisy Wai: My question is for the Associate Minister of Transportation. Last week, I was delighted to see that as part of Bill 197, the government is proposing new measures to enable transit-oriented communities at new subway stations.

This builds on the historic transit partnership agreement that the province recently signed with York region as a positive next step towards shovels in the ground for the long-anticipated Yonge North subway extension into Richmond Hill. My riding in Richmond Hill is very happy, Mr. Speaker. I have to say that Richmond Hill is happy to see that so much progress on this file has been made during the pandemic.

Can the minister tell us more about what the government’s TOC program is and how it will benefit existing and new residents of Richmond Hill, along with other communities?

Hon. Kinga Surma: I want to thank the member from Richmond Hill for her unwavering support for transit expansion in Richmond Hill. You have done a wonderful job representing your constituents.

As she mentioned, we have been quite busy on the transit file despite COVID-19, and I was so happy that we were able to sign our landmark transit partnership agreement with York region to build the Yonge North subway extension, plus a memorandum of understanding for transit-oriented communities. These agreements outline roles, responsibilities and shared priorities when it comes to building this critical subway infrastructure.

Transit-oriented communities offer us a chance to build stations better. Instead of building new stations in isolation, we intend to build complete mixed-use communities that are physically integrated into transit stations. The transit-oriented communities program will provide a mix of housing, including affordable housing, plus daycares, recreational spaces, services and other amenities that residents so desperately need.

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

Mrs. Daisy Wai: Thank you very much, Minister. It is really very encouraging to see that this government is serious about challenging the status quo and building subways, which we have been waiting for for a long time, while delivering enhancements to the local community. There is no question that building a complete community while we’re building a transit station is just common sense. This practice is being done elsewhere in the world and elsewhere in Canada with success.

However, previous provincial governments in Ontario have lacked this integrated approach and have missed opportunities to deliver benefits for residents. Can the minister please tell the House what the government is proposing to do to ensure that TOCs become a reality in Richmond Hill and across networks in the new subway stations?

Hon. Kinga Surma: I share the member’s frustration that previous provincial governments have missed opportunities to maximize the benefits from transit expansion and that we have fallen behind other jurisdictions. For months, we have been consulting with experts like planners, housing advocates, job creators and city builders. They have consistently pointed to three barriers from realizing transit-oriented communities: land assembly taking far too long, planning and zoning processes are highly uncertain, and the province lacking the ability and flexibility to enter into commercial arrangements with the private sector.

However, that is all changing with Bill 197. If passed, it will address these barriers responsibly while still respecting the rights of property owners and working collaboratively with our municipal partners and stakeholders. We will get the region moving again, reduce congestion, strengthen our communities and drive economic recovery from COVID-19.

COVID-19

Miss Monique Taylor: My question is for the Premier. For weeks, constituents in my riding of Hamilton Mountain have been calling my office to tell me that they are waiting for delayed COVID-19 test results. Despite the Minister of Health’s claim that test results arrive in 48 hours, people in my community are waiting a week or longer for those results. Some still don’t have the results after 13 days.

These delays are making it very difficult for Ontarians to ensure their own health and safety. All these constituents want is confirmation that it is safe for them to interact with their loved ones or to know whether or not their health is in immediate jeopardy.

Why won’t this government fix their broken testing system so that these families can finally have some peace of mind?

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

Hon. Christine Elliott: In fact, we have significantly enhanced our testing strategy since the outset of COVID-19. We are now able to regularly test over 20,000 people per day. We are building our capacity to 50,000, because we know that with the upcoming flu season and a potential second wave coming, we will need to be able to do that.

That being said, we know that nothing is more important than the health and safety of the people of Ontario. There are enhancements that we need to continue to do. There are some circumstances where there are particular situations where we can’t get the testing done within 24 hours or 48 hours. We’re up to almost 80% of the testing being done in 48 hours, but we are continuing to work on that, because we know that people want to be able to return to work. They want to be able to be going out, if they have a negative result. So we’re constantly working on that. That is something that we work on a daily basis, as we increase our testing capacity as well.

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

Miss Monique Taylor: Increasing the testing capacity isn’t doing anything if people cannot get the results within two weeks.

Again to the Premier: To make matters worse, those who want to visit their loved ones in long-term care or other congregate care settings need to receive a negative test result within 14 days of that visit. However, because of the delays, I’ve heard from many constituents who have missed their visitation appointments. These are people who have been unable to see their families for months. Now, due to this government’s failure, they are missing visiting appointments that they have so been looking forward to, as you can imagine.

Speaker, this should have been fixed months ago. Words are not enough any longer. We need action. How much longer are Ontarians going to have to wait before this government finally gets around to doing their job and fixing the problems with our testing system?

Hon. Christine Elliott: In fact, since the outset of COVID-19, we were initially able to perform about 5,000 tests per day; we’re now at over 20,000, and we’re regularly testing over 20,000 people per day.

With that, of course the test results need to come back on a timely basis, and the vast majority of the cases do come back within 48 hours. There are some areas where there are particular circumstances which we would be happy to look into, but I must reiterate to people: If you feel that you need a COVID test, please go and get one. You will get the results back in a timely manner.

We’ll look into this particular situation, but we have dramatically increased the testing capacity in Ontario, such that we have the highest level of testing across Canada, and we’re going to continue to maintain that.

Tourism and hospitality industry

Ms. Donna Skelly: My question is to the Minister of Heritage, Sport, Tourism and Culture. Since the outbreak of COVID-19, our government has taken a proactive approach to support Ontario’s $75-billion suite of heritage, sport, tourism and culture sectors. One of the first actions taken by the minister was the creation of 14 ministerial advisory panels with experts and professionals who understand their industries best. They have been meeting regularly to discuss sector-specific concerns and solutions.

Mr. Speaker, the minister’s Hoteliers and Hospitality Panel has been working hard to support Ontario’s hospitality industry. Whether it be through providing deputations to the Standing Committee on Finance and Economic Affairs or providing advice to government, we know that our hotels play an incredibly important role to our business and visitor economy.

Can the minister please tell this House just how important hoteliers are to Ontario?

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: I want to say thank you in particular to the member for her interest in this area but also her understanding of the tourism sector and what has happened to it since COVID-19 hit.

The hotel and accommodation sector in Ontario was decimated. It generally is worth about $8.5 billion in revenues across the province, but overnight, on the 12th of March, in the lead-up to the March break, that collapsed almost overnight, as I said. According to the Hotel Association of Canada, at that time, less than 10% occupancy was taking place across the province, contributing to over 250,000 job losses. In my city alone, in the city of Ottawa, we have over 100 hotels—50% of them shuttered, including the iconic Chateau Laurier. They employed over 6,000 people, yet 80% of them lost their employment during that time.

That’s why I created the ministerial advisory committee on hotels and accommodation. Speaking with them earlier today, we’re going to make sure, as we enter into phase 3, that they are consulted and that we continue to support them, but we don’t expect recovery until 2022.

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

Ms. Donna Skelly: Minister, I know that your passion for supporting such a vital sector in our economy will serve all of us well as you continue to work with our hoteliers and experts in upcoming weeks. This will be particularly important as our province gradually reopens additional businesses and attractions. Safe accommodation will be top of mind for Ontarians travelling locally or visiting parts of the province for business and professional development.

As we look towards phase 3 coming to some of the communities in our province very soon, more of our economy is going to be showcased and able to thrive. Can the minister tell us how the next steps in Ontario’s phased reopening strategy will benefit our hospitality sectors as well as sites that serve the business community?

Hon. Lisa MacLeod: As a member of the Standing Committee on Finance and Economic Affairs, she would have heard well over 250 deputants coming from our sectors about the high impact that COVID-19 has had on them as a result of the public health crisis, the economic crisis, and then one I’m going to talk about: the social crisis we have been dealing with.

Abacus Data has just recently done a report that says that 61% of Canadians feel it’s too risky to stay in a hotel. At a time when 40% of visitor spending happens during these months, that’s stark news for us in the tourism sector. That’s why our ministry has invested $13 million in hyperlocal tourism marketing to support hotels and resorts across the province as well as local communities. That’s why I have visited, and led by example—and I’m asking all members of this assembly to do the same—Gananoque and had the opportunity to stay at the Holiday Inn Express. I visited Bracebridge to stay at Deerhurst Resort. I visited Windsor to stay at the Best Western.

I’m asking all members of this assembly to lead by example, tour our communities across this great province, and let the tourism industry, including our hoteliers, know how much we value them in each of—

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

Next, we have the member for Waterloo.

Economic reopening and recovery

Ms. Catherine Fife: My question is to the Premier. Speaker, at the beginning of the pandemic, you could forgive the government for policies that needed tweaking and changes and clarification; it was an unprecedented time. However, it has been months now, and businesses continue to struggle just to survive in this province.

In Waterloo, family-owned virtual reality business Ctrl V is on the brink. They’ve had no revenue stream for four months, plus a lack of clarity around reopening—which doesn’t instill confidence. They’re $60,000 in debt and trying to stay viable for their 14 employees.

Despite the evictions ban, their landlord won’t participate in the CECRA, just like the other 40% of landlords in Ontario. CECRA is failing. Businesses need a commercial rent subsidy, full stop. We’ve heard this from multiple businesses at the finance committee.

Speaker, is this government willing to let thousands of businesses like Ctrl V go out of business, or will they provide them with the direct financial support they deserve? They supported us; we need to support them.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Minister of Finance.

Hon. Rod Phillips: I thank the member for that important question. I know that she’ll be tuned in to watch the press conference today for the very exciting news, because the ability for businesses to be open is what they want.

To support the health needs, to support beating COVID-19, our businesses and our communities have needed to take the steps that our health professionals require. That’s why we provided $17 billion of support, including extensive tax deferrals, including support for business, including support for individuals.

The commercial rent program run by the federal government now has over 20,000 tenants, representing over 100,000 employees who work with those tenants. It continues to grow and continues to have momentum. So yes, this government will stand with small business, as it has already. The most important element of that is going to be the reopening of our economy in a safe and sustainable way.

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

Ms. Catherine Fife: You know, this government has deferred debt—that’s what this government has done—which means that the businesses will go out of business a little later.

Ctrl V has worked really hard to advocate for improved programs. They have actually received nothing from this government. When they return, they’re only going to be generating 25% of their revenue. They’re $60,000 in debt. They’re a small franchise with a few locations in the GTA and Alberta; three of them in Ontario have already closed.

To add insult to injury, whenever they have inquired about reopening their other locations, they have received mixed messages. In one jurisdiction, they were classified as a water park/casino. In another one, they were classified as a movie theatre.

At the very least, businesses deserve clarity about when they can and cannot open. Are there public health thresholds that need to be met? If so, businesses ought to know, and they need support to get there.

If these businesses fail, we will not recover in our economy. The number one ask that we have heard, from finance committee, is a direct commercial rent subsidy, just like our Save Main Street plan. When will this government step up and fight for these businesses?

Hon. Rod Phillips: Over $1 billion with our federal partners, to support rent for small businesses; Mr. Speaker, $10 billion of supports. The member can call them deferrals; she voted for them, in terms of support. Support: $300 of support for electricity for your average small business.

Mr. Speaker, I take exception with—this member is saying that some businesses, like water parks and amusement parks and even casinos, should have been opened prior to now. That’s not the best advice we’ve received from our health professionals. We will continue to open Ontario in a safe and deliberate way. I advise that member and the rest of the members of the Legislature to tune in for the Premier’s press conference. We will not put the safety of Ontarians behind what is right for the overall economy.

What we are supporting is a sustainable reopening. Surely she has seen what’s happened in the United States when those kinds of facilities were opened too soon. Surely, Mr. Speaker, she’ll support the Premier today and the announcement that will be coming later in the day.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Order.

The next question.

Sport fishing

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: My question is to the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry. My riding of Barrie–Innisfil is home, yes, to the Innisfil Summerfest Kids Fishing Derby, where many children go fishing with the South Simcoe Police Service and their families. But as families look to connect with the outdoors and of course with beautiful Lake Simcoe in Barrie–Innisfil, they look for ways they can do it affordably.

I wanted to ask the minister: As people are really angling to get outdoors, what is he doing to connect more people with nature?

Hon. John Yakabuski: Thank you to the great member for Barrie–Innisfil for her question. She’s right: Everyone has been affected by COVID-19 here in the province of Ontario, and all across the world, indeed. Isolation has been a real problem for everybody, but particularly those who live in an urban environment where they don’t have the great outdoors at their beck and call and in their back 40, as they say.

So we’ve done something this year that we haven’t done in the past, and that is, in addition to the free fishing on Family Day weekend, Mother’s Day weekend and Father’s Day weekend, and a free fishing week the first full week of July, we’ve made it two full weeks in July: free fishing all across Ontario, licence-free to anyone from Canada. Fish all across the province of Ontario without a fishing licence, without an outdoors card, to enjoy this great family activity. What better way to get together with your family than to get out in the great outdoors, where you’re safer to begin with? It’s a low-risk activity, and we’ve extended it for a week this year, Speaker.

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

Ms. Andrea Khanjin: Thank you to the Minister of Natural Resources for getting more people hooked on fishing. It’s truly incredible to see.

I think of Simcoe Tackle in Barrie–Innisfil. I just visited them this weekend. Stephano and Jesi just opened their angling store back in February. Really, they show that fishing is a big contributor to our economy. In fact, it’s really part of Ontario’s heritage and its culture, contributing over $230 million a year to our local economy. I think of marinas in my riding, whether it’s Sandy Cove marina or Cooks Bay Marina, Monto-Reno Marina, Lefroy Harbour or Big Bay Point: They’re all benefitting from these types of stimulus that the minister was talking about.

I wanted him to talk more about how fishing is going to impact jobs and really strengthen our communities across this province.

Hon. John Yakabuski: I thank the member again for the question. As usual, she is absolutely correct: The impact that fishing has on so many people in so many ways quite frankly is countless all across this province—again, all across the world. It has a $230-million impact on her local economy. In Ontario it has a $1.6-billion impact annually and it is particularly felt in rural and northern communities.

A way of life—absolutely. Fishing has been around as long as we’ve been around. It’s even referred to in the Bible. Fishing has been around as long as we have walked the face of the Earth. It’s a tremendous cultural activity. It’s a way of life and it’s something that we want to ensure that we encourage here in the province of Ontario.

And what better way, as I say, to spend time with your family but also to support those vital businesses that have been impacted? The tourism minister knows that people in the tourism business have been affected as much as anybody by this pandemic. It’s a good way to support those vital businesses as well.

Child care

Mrs. Jennifer (Jennie) Stevens: My question is to the Premier. Speaker, Katie Tulloch is a teacher from St. Catharines. Her son is starting JK at Lockview Public School in the fall. The shortage of child care and the uncertainty about the school year is creating significant stress for Katie, whose partner also works full time as a nurse on the front lines of this pandemic. They are unable to be admitted to the before- and after-school care at Lockview because it is full. The uncertainty about September is creating higher demand for child care in the Niagara region. They have no other options.

Speaker, both parents are deemed essential workers and pivotal in the fight against COVID-19 and getting Ontario back up and running for September. How does this government expect students to be able to return to school if even our most essential workers cannot find child care?

Hon. Stephen Lecce: Thank you to the member opposite for the question. The commitment of the government is to ensure that as our economy recovers we are able to care for our children. We understand the relationship between a strong child care system and the economic recovery of our province. It’s why, in very short order, we’ll be taking action to expand child care capacity to ensure more parents can return to work with confidence that their child is safe.

Our default and our guiding light is safety. It is safety in schools; it’s safety in child care centres. With respect to schools, we’ve been clear that we will be prepared for three scenarios, but the preference of government continues to be a conventional model.

We are so grateful to the people of Ontario for adhering to public health advice. It allows us to place greater emphasis on that conventional day-to-day model. We know it will be important for parents to return to work in September.

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

Mrs. Jennifer (Jennie) Stevens: Again, to the Premier: When Niagara opened to stage 2, Sarah, a single mother and a constituent of mine, reached out to me because she needed child care to return to work full time, but she couldn’t find anything. By the time she found child care, two weeks later, her employer told her that they had filled the full-time position, and now she has to go down to part time.

Speaker, we know that this pandemic is hitting women in a particular way, and this government is only going to make things worse. It is not fair that a full-time working single mother has to choose between her job and secure child care. How will this government prevent women like Sarah from being disproportionately hit by this pandemic when it is quite clear there is not enough child care available?

Hon. Stephen Lecce: Speaker, what wouldn’t have been fair to working parents is if their fees were increased or their spaces were removed. What we did is take action with an emergency order, and now by regulation, to deny operators that ability, to ensure consumer protection for working parents.

A precondition of provincial funding, the enhanced operating supports we’re providing to our child care operators, is that they must not increase fees on working people. Likewise, they must not remove those spaces from parents in the province.

Speaker, we understand that relationship for parents in the province, that they’re able to return to work. It’s why we will be expanding child care capacity in the province, working in alignment with Public Health and Dr. Williams, the Chief Medical Officer of Health, because the people of this province have done great work in reducing that risk and, as a consequence, we’ll be taking action to align child care with the stage 3 reopening.

We believe, Speaker, it’s important that we support parents, we keep their kids safe and we ensure that our operators and our child care centres remain sustainable for decades to come.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): That concludes question period for this morning.

Deferred Votes

Time allocation

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): We have a deferred vote on government notice of motion number 83, relating to the allocation of time on Bill 167,

An Act to amend the Legislative Assembly Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts.

The bells will ring for 30 minutes, during which time members may cast their votes. I would ask the Clerks to prepare the lobbies.

The division bells rang from 1138 to 1208.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): The vote was held on government notice of motion number 83, relating to allocation of time on Bill 167,

An Act to amend the Legislative Assembly Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts.

The Clerk of the Assembly (Mr. Todd Decker): The ayes are 60; the nays are 16.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I declare the motion carried.

Motion agreed to.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): This House stands in recess until 1 p.m.

The House recessed from 1209 to 1300.

Reports by Committees

Standing Committee on Finance and Economic Affairs

Mr. Amarjot Sandhu: I beg leave to present the first interim report, Economic and Fiscal Update Act, 2020, of the Standing Committee on Finance and Economic Affairs.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Mr. Sandhu presents the committee’s report. Does the member wish to make a brief statement?

Mr. Amarjot Sandhu: The committee is pleased to present its first interim report on the Economic and Fiscal Update Act, 2020, and the impact of the COVID-19 crisis on certain sectors of the economy. This report addresses the first part of the committee’s mandate, which is to consider the Economic and Fiscal Update Act, 2020, together with letters filed by party leaders and independent members containing recommendations relating to the act.

In accordance with the committee’s terms of reference, the Minister of Finance appeared as the committee’s first witness on June 1, 2020. Ontario’s Financial Accountability Officer also made a presentation and answered questions. On behalf of the committee, I would like to thank them for speaking to us.

I would also like to take this opportunity to thank the members of the committee, the Clerk of the Committee and the committee staff for their commitment, hard work and co-operation.

Report presented.

Petitions

Climate change

Ms. Jessica Bell: This petition is called, “Support the Green New Democratic Deal.

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas” the Premier “is being socially and environmentally irresponsible by ignoring our climate emergency and cutting funding to address the climate crisis;

“Therefore we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario to urge the government of Ontario to implement the Green New Democratic Deal to:

“—achieve net zero emissions by 2050, starting by cutting emissions 50% by 2030;

“—create more than a million new jobs;

“—add billions of dollars to Ontario’s economy;

“—embark on the largest building retrofit program in the world by providing homeowners with rebates, interest-free loans and support to retrofit their homes to realize net zero emissions.”

I support this petition, I’ll be affixing my signature to it and giving it to the usher.

Justices of the peace

Mr. Mike Harris: I have a petition here entitled, “Proposed Changes to Justices of the Peace Act Petition.

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas the government of Ontario remains committed to pressing forward towards a more accessible, responsive and resilient justice system; and

“Whereas the current process to appoint justices of the peace is outdated and slow. This has created obstacles to filling vacancies, resulting in delays for people wanting their day in court; and

“Whereas there is a need for greater transparency and the promotion of more diversity throughout the recruitment and appointment process; and

“Whereas maintaining the integrity of Ontario’s appointment process for justices of the peace is vital to the administration of a strong justice system;

“Therefore we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows, so that:

“

(1) The act is amended with respect to the composition and processes of the Justices of the Peace Appointments Advisory Committee;

“

(2) The composition of the committee is changed to be leaner and more efficient while continuing to ensure local voices are present. The importance of committees representing the diversity of the communities they serve shall be recognized;

“

(3) The committee may hold its meetings and conduct interviews in person or through electronic means, includeing telephone conferencing and video conferencing.”

I fully support this petition and will affix my signature.

Justices of the peace

Ms. Goldie Ghamari: This petition is entitled “Proposed Changes to Justices of the Peace Act Petition.

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas the government of Ontario remains committed to pressing forward towards a more accessible, responsive and resilient justice system; and

“Whereas the current process to appoint justices of the peace is outdated and slow. This has created obstacles to filling vacancies, resulting in delays for people wanting their day in court; and

“Whereas there is a need for greater transparency and the promotion of more diversity throughout the recruitment and appointment process; and

“Whereas maintaining the integrity of Ontario’s appointment process for justices of the peace is vital to the administration of a strong justice system;

“Therefore we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows, so that:

“

(1) The act is amended with respect to the composition and processes of the Justices of the Peace Appointments Advisory Committee;

“

(2) The composition of the committee is changed to be leaner and more efficient while continuing to ensure local voices are present. The importance of committees representing the diversity of the communities they serve shall be recognized;

“

(3) The committee may hold its meetings and conduct interviews in person or through electronic means, includeing telephone conferencing and video conferencing.”

I affix my signature to this petition, and I will hand it to the Clerk.

Justices of the peace

Ms. Amy Fee: I have a petition entitled “Proposed Changes to Justices of the Peace Act Petition.

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas the government of Ontario remains committed to pressing forward towards a more accessible, responsive and resilient justice system; and

“Whereas the current process to appoint justices of the peace is outdated and slow. This has created obstacles to filling vacancies, resulting in delays for people wanting their day in court; and

“Whereas there is a need for greater transparency and the promotion of more diversity throughout the recruitment and appointment process; and

“Whereas maintaining the integrity of Ontario’s appointment process for justices of the peace is vital to the administration of a strong justice system;

“Therefore we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows, so that:

“

(1) The act is amended with respect to the composition and processes of the Justices of the Peace Appointments Advisory Committee;

“

(2) The composition of the committee is changed to be leaner and more efficient while continuing to ensure local voices are present. The importance of committees representing the diversity of the communities they serve shall be recognized;

“

(3) The committee may hold its meetings and conduct interviews in person or through electronic means, includeing telephone conferencing and video conferencing.”

I fully support this petition, will be affixing my name and bringing it to the Clerk.

Justices of the peace

Ms. Effie J. Triantafilopoulos: I have a petition: “Proposed Changes to Justices of the Peace Act Petition.

“To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

“Whereas the government of Ontario remains committed to pressing forward towards a more accessible, responsive and resilient justice system; and

“Whereas the current process to appoint justices of the peace is outdated and slow. This has created obstacles to filling vacancies, resulting in delays for people wanting their day in court; and

“Whereas there is a need for greater transparency and the promotion of more diversity throughout the recruitment and appointment process; and

“Whereas maintaining the integrity of Ontario’s appointment process for justices of the peace is vital to the administration of a strong justice system;

“Therefore we, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows, so that:

“

(1) The act is amended with respect to the composition and processes of the Justices of the Peace Appointments Advisory Committee;

“

(2) The composition of the committee is changed to be leaner and more efficient while continuing to ensure local voices are present. The importance of committees representing the diversity of the communities they serve shall be recognized;

“

(3) The committee may hold its meetings and conduct interviews in person or through electronic means, includeing telephone conferencing and video conferencing.”

I fully support this petition and affix my signature here.

Orders of the Day

Extension of emergency declaration

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): I’ll recognize the Solicitor General.

Hon. Sylvia Jones: I move:

Whereas an emergency was declared by order in council 518/2020 (O. Reg. 50/20) on March 17, 2020, pursuant to

section 7.0.1 of the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act; and

Whereas the emergency was extended past the end of March 31, 2020, for a period of 14 days by O. Reg. 84/20 on March 30, 2020, pursuant to subsection 7.0.7(2) of the act; and

Whereas the emergency was extended by resolution of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario for a period of 28 days on April 14, 2020, pursuant to subsection 7.0.7(3) of the act; and

Whereas the emergency was extended by resolution of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario for a period of 21 days on May 12, 2020, pursuant to subsection 7.0.7(3) of the act; and

Whereas the emergency was extended by resolution of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario for a period of 28 days on June 2, 2020, pursuant to subsection 7.0.7(3) of the act, ending June 30, 2020; and

Whereas the emergency was extended by resolution of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario for a period of 15 days past the end of June 30, 2020, on June 24, 2020, pursuant to subsection 7.0.7(3) of the act; and

Whereas the period of the emergency may be further extended only by resolution of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, pursuant to subsection 7.0.7(3) of the act; and

Whereas the Premier has recommended that the period of the emergency be extended for nine days past the end of July 15, 2020;

Therefore, the Legislative Assembly of Ontario hereby declares that the period of the emergency is extended past the end of July 15, 2020, for a further period of nine days.

The Speaker (Hon. Ted Arnott): Ms. Jones has moved government notice of motion number 84. Further debate? I’ll recognize again the Solicitor General.

Hon. Sylvia Jones: It is an honour to be in the House to open the debate on what I hope will be the final proposed extension of the provincial declaration of emergency.

Ontario is on a path to recovery. The job numbers announced last Friday demonstrate that Ontario’s economy is beginning to stabilize. According to Statistics Canada, employment in Ontario increased by 377,900 jobs in June, including an increase of 66,200 manufacturing jobs. That number is so much more than a statistic. It represents real people, families, business owners and workers who are back to work and contributing to Ontario’s economic recovery.

Nobody can tell for certain what the recovery will look like over the short to medium term. What we do know is, the threat of COVID-19 is still very real and, without a vaccine, the potential for a spike in cases or a second wave is something for which we must all prepare. Without continued vigilance, the incredible progress that Ontarians have made to stop the spread of COVID-19 and support our economic recovery could soon disappear. All 14.5 million Ontarians have pulled together to contain this virus.

I want to thank the health care heroes, the front-line responders, the caregivers, essential service workers, the businesses that jumped into manufacturing personal protective equipment, and the public, who protected themselves and those around them through physical distancing and other public health measures.

As I have done previously when discussing the collective actions of Ontarians in response to COVID-19, I want to provide an update regarding the Ontario Together portal. Through the portal, more than 27,000 submissions to help Ontario source critical emergency supplies, technologies and innovations have been received across the three streams since the launch. More than 18,000 emergency supply leads have been converted into more than $658 million in purchases of critical supplies and equipment to support staff on the front lines, including more than 27 million gowns, more than 175 million gloves, 123 million masks and over four million face shields.

There were over 1,200 responses to our first three challenges to support the delivery of mental health solutions to vulnerable populations, to ensure the strength of our supply chains and to deliver financial advice to our small business community. Over 6,800 ideas have been submitted through the portal on how to address the COVID-19 outbreak, including offers to retool their business to make critical supplies or to deliver goods or services needed at this time. If it wasn’t for all these efforts and so many more, we wouldn’t be here today talking about managing the recovery.

The COVID-19 emergency has not been without loss, either. We must also remember those who have lost their lives.

Speaker, today, as we debate extending the declaration of emergency until July 24, I would like to draw members’ attention to the declaration’s role in stewarding the province along the road to recovery. All of Ontario is now in stage 2 of the province’s reopening plan. When the time is right, remaining workplaces and community spaces will also reopen as part of stage 3 and beyond. At the same time, public health advice and workplace safety guidance must continue to be respected.

The provincial declaration of emergency is meant to be a temporary measure to respond to an extraordinary crisis. As we consider next steps, the government must continue to have the right tools at our disposal to respond quickly to reduce the dangers of COVID-19, protect lives and reopen the province in a gradual and safe manner. We propose to do just that, Speaker.

On July 7, I introduced Bill 195, Reopening Ontario (A Flexible Response to COVID-19) Act, 2020. I look forward to beginning second reading of that proposed legislation. If passed, this legislation will support our continued efforts to cautiously reopen Ontario in a way that recognizes that the COVID-19 impacts may still be felt for some time to come. It would allow Ontario to continue along our path to recovery while easing restrictions where appropriate and maintaining important, select tools to respond to the impacts of COVID-19.

And it will ensure that important measures remain in place to address the threat of COVID-19 once the provincial declaration of emergency has ended. That is currently scheduled to happen on July 15.

As members know, once the declaration of emergency is terminated, emergency orders under the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act could no longer be amended and could only be extended if they are necessary to deal with the effects of the emergency. Ending the declaration of emergency without a plan in place would compromise the government’s ability to continue to protect Ontarians.

In previous comments before the House, I have described this process as the difference between a light switch and a dimmer, and this comparison remains true. Without a plan in place, should the declaration terminate, the province would only have the ability to turn the orders in place at the end of the declaration on or off. For example, the current order regarding public gatherings is limited to 10 people. Turning this order off would return us to the pre-COVID-19 state of affairs with no limits on large gatherings.

I am sure that most members of this Legislature would agree that this is not the appropriate course of action given the threat of a resurgence. We need only to look south of the border to see what happens when jurisdictions let their guard down too soon.

If passed, Bill 195 would bridge the gap between the public health measures that were necessary to respond to the initial and immediate threat of COVID-19 during the provincial declaration of emergency and those that will continue to be needed to support Ontarians’ safe recovery once the declaration ends. It would, to continue my analogy, allow us to use a dimmer switch approach to public health measures by gradually ratcheting down public health measures as we continue to successfully battle this virus or to ratchet them up incrementally should that become necessary. I will speak more to the refinement of emergency tools available under the proposed Bill 195 during its leadoff debate.

To maintain continuity of our government’s COVID-19 response, I’m asking members to support extending the declaration of emergency to July 24. Without this extension, Ontario would enter a period when some emergency orders could continue to be extended but could not be amended while the Legislature debates what’s next when it comes to Bill 195.

We know that things can change quickly and that we need to remain nimble in our response to this virus. Emergency orders have enabled the government to take important actions, such as limiting long-term-care employees to working in no more than one facility, in an effort to limit the spread of COVID-19 among our province’s most vulnerable citizens. They have given hospitals the flexibility to redeploy staff where they are needed most during the COVID-19 outbreak.

Our government took further action in this area to increase the front-line capacity of hospitals, clinics and assessment centres by launching a health workforce matching portal, to help bring together skilled front-line medical workers with employers.

Early in the crisis, Premier Ford sent a powerful message that we will not tolerate price gouging. We were able to back that up through an emergency order to stop retail businesses and individuals from charging unfair prices for everyday products that Ontarians need.

Many of these orders, as well as other measures that don’t fall under emergency orders, are in place to help lessen the hardship of COVID-19 on Ontarians and small businesses.

That includes temporarily freezing residential eviction notices; temporarily halting commercial evictions, while encouraging landlords to take advantage of the federal-provincial rent subsidy program; supporting workers and businesses in Ontario’s vibrant hospitality sector by allowing bars and restaurants to sell alcohol with their takeout and delivery orders; and cutting red tape to allow municipalities to quickly pass temporary-use bylaws, to allow restaurants to create or extend patios to accommodate physical distancing and serve more people.

Speaker, the declaration of emergency helped propel us forward from March 17 to the point where we are here today. When we made the decision to declare an emergency back in March, we knew we were facing an unprecedented challenge. For almost a century, no one has had to deal with a crisis on the scale of COVID-19, especially not here in Ontario.

The emergency orders this government has put in place were established with the advice we heard from public health and other experts. We took action to rapidly engage, listen and respond across a wide range of ministries and sectors to figure out what we had to do to get Ontario through this. Together, the emergency orders that resulted from that important work are a specific response to Ontario’s outbreak, tailored to the needs of our province. I think both the government and Ontarians have done work we can be proud of to stop the spread and mitigate the impacts of this deadly virus.

I’ll take a moment to thank the dedicated public servants at the Ministry of the Solicitor General, the Ministry of Health, public health and, indeed, all across government who have been working around the clock since the start of the declaration of emergency to respond at all stages of the response. We were able to do that because the emergency declaration gave us much-needed flexibility, which has directly benefitted the people of Ontario. That flexibility would be temporarily lost if the provincial declaration of emergency is not extended before this Legislature determines what will take its place.

Since declaring the provincial emergency on March 17, our government has taken careful and deliberate action to protect Ontarians. The provincial declaration of emergency supported our comprehensive response to the COVID-19 outbreak and allowed us to create emergency orders to address critical needs as they arose. It provided a temporary platform for decisive action that carried Ontario through unprecedented challenges and helped us initiate the first important steps of reopening our province.

I want to assure this House that when the provincial declaration of emergency is terminated, should Ontario experience a significant spike in cases or a second wave of COVID-19 that requires a more comprehensive approach again, we will not hesitate to seek a new provincial emergency order if, and only if, necessary.

Speaker, COVID-19 has resulted in lives tragically lost and fundamental changes to our world. Our government’s proposed Bill 195 focuses on recovery from COVID-19. It would support the gradual and safe reopening of the province, while continuing to enable us to manage the effects of this outbreak. I look forward to debating the merits of Bill 195 in this House, and invite input from my MPP colleagues.

This debate must be carried out with the security that the government still has the necessary tools at its disposal to quickly respond to any outgoing risks and effects of COVID-19 that may emerge, and that the transition from the provincial declaration of emergency to whatever the House decides is seamless and protects all Ontarians.

I hark back to what Premier Ford has said: When the history books are written, it will be said that the people of Ontario never surrendered to the virus. We didn’t quit when the going got tough.

So much has been accomplished, and so much still lies ahead of us. The provincial declaration of emergency was a product of its time. As we move from emergency to recovery, the time has come to decide what tools we need now so we can continue to reopen while maintaining the safety of the province and protecting the public. I ask members to support extending the declaration of emergency until July 24.

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

Mr. Gilles Bisson: First of all, I want to say at the outset of the debate that New Democrats, as has been the case each and every time the request has been put to the Legislature for us to enact the powers available to the government under the Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act—we have supported and we will continue to support those requests, because we understand, as does everybody in this Legislature and most of the people out in the public, that these measures are necessary as a way of being able to contain the pandemic as it ravages its way through the world and places across this province, as well.

I want to say, however, before beginning my comments on this motion and somewhat on Bill 195, that it’s a bit of a sad thing that’s going on in the Legislature these days. We found out, literally as the government got up to move this motion, what was going to be debated. The Speaker will know, because he has been here, like me, for almost 30 years now, that there is normally an exchange between the government House leader and the opposition House leader to be able to say, “Here is the business we would like to debate the upcoming week.” There’s a discussion, there’s a meeting on Thursdays or whatever day it’s convenient to do so, and at least we have the

schedule of the House so that everybody is able to plan what we’re going to speak to when.

The government has decided, in the middle of a pandemic, to do as they did during the Second World War: run silent. That’s what they used to talk about. Submarines “running silent” was a way of saying “keeping it under the radar,” “not being caught.” The government has decided, rather than work with the opposition to be able to face issues such as this that we both agree on—clearly, we both support this particular motion. The government has taken the position that they’re not even going to tell us what bill they’re going to be debating. There really isn’t any discussion between House leaders these days.

The government decided to take a position of, “We’re going to do as we please. If you’re oppositional in any way, we’re going to punish you by not providing you with any information.”

I know we’re going to get a diatribe from the government House leader when he finally gets to his feet at the end of this debate. He’s going to accuse New Democrats: “Oh, they’re stalling. They don’t want to do anything. They don’t want to work.” We’re going to hear it all. But I just want people to understand that the Legislature has been operating for many, many a year, and it’s operated by both the government and the opposition not necessarily agreeing on what government should be doing, but at least how we move stuff through the House.

In the end, the government has the right to propose any legislation it wants. The people of Ontario gave the government that right, and we respect that—all of us in this House, the government side and opposition. But they also gave the members of the House who are elected on the opposition side the ability to ask questions, the ability to propose that maybe things should be done differently. The government doesn’t have to accept that information. They don’t have to accept that advice. We understand that.

But we have a responsibility as well, as legislators, to propose that maybe we should do something different or maybe we should do it differently altogether. And for the government to get upset because the opposition suggested to do something different and the way to deal with that is to punish them by not letting them know what the agenda of the House is going to be on a daily basis, I think is a bit childish. It really is.

We can agree to disagree. I have no dislike for anybody on the government side. The government is honest in its assessment of the situation. They see things differently than I do, but that’s human nature. That’s how we operate as human beings. We don’t necessarily have to agree, but at least we have to work with each other. I would just think that I would take the Premier’s words at face value, that in a pandemic we should be working together. Does that mean to say that we are going to agree on everything? No.

It means to say that we at least have a conversation about what we can agree on, what we don’t agree on, and what we would do differently. And where there’s unanimity or agreement on how we should move forward, then we should do so, and we’ve done that in this Legislature since the beginning of the pandemic up until about the month of May.

We and the independents as well, along with the government, have worked together on a number of initiatives in order to be able try to soften the blow to the public’s dealing with this whole pandemic. But the government got upset because the opposition decided it wanted to oppose something that the government was doing and suggested things should be done differently when it comes to committee and otherwise. The government got mad and said, “You don’t like that? Well, we don’t have to tell you anything. From now on, we’re just going to do and you’re going to find out when we do it.” Sorry. I just think that’s sad.

Again, I have no argument with the government as to its right to do whatever it wants. The government has the right to propose and to utilize its majority to pass its agenda through the House and its committees. No argument. That’s just the way the parliamentary system works and we all understand that. But I do have a problem when the government says, “Well, you disagree with me, so therefore I’m going to take this position of not telling you what I’m doing.”

I hope that the government rethinks that position because it’s out of sync with what the Premier has been saying and what the public thinks is going on. When you’re back in your riding or you’re talking to people here in Toronto or whatever, there’s a great impression that the government is working in a non-partisan way in order to be able to do what needs to be done in this pandemic—and there are some things that the government has done that are quite reasonable as far as, I would say, pretty well all of the orders under the powers given to them under the emergency management act.

The government has taken some steps which we, the opposition, agree with them had to be taken. Otherwise, we would be in the same position that we see in places like Florida and Texas and other parts of the world.

Interruption.

Mr. Gilles Bisson: That’s interesting. Sorry, I was hearing a siren in the back. I was wondering if that was somebody trying to get a hold of me all of a sudden here.

But I would just say that my point is that if the government, if the Premier is telling us that we should be working together and the public thinks that we’re working together, maybe the government should try at least letting us know what their agenda is going to be in advance so that at least we can be ready.

We’re not going to complain about it, Mr. Speaker. You and I have been here for 30 years. You can put anything in the House you want. I’m ready, you’re ready and all of my NDP colleagues are ready. We’re fine. We’re not going to cry over spilled milk. But it’s just a rather sad state of affairs when the government says, “You know what? You don’t have the right to be oppositional to the government and disagree with what we do, and if you do, we’re going to punish you.” That’s kind of an abuse of power, I think. Not for me—actually, I’ll let people decide for themselves rather than me pronouncing it.

I say to the government across the way, you should utilize whatever ability you have to try to work with us when you can. There are going to be times we’re going to disagree—for example, Bill 195, I’m going to disagree even before we get into this debate.

I read the legislation. There has not been a case in this House where the government has asked for the ability to declare an emergency order where the opposition refused or delayed it—not a case. Yes, we’ve debated somewhat, for a short period of time, the actual emergency order because members want to get on the record. They want to be able to put their points forward. That’s what this Legislature’s all about, Mr. Speaker. It’s about members coming here and representing the views of their constituents. There has not been a case where they’ve been refused. So I’m saying, what is the government trying to fix here?

I heard the explanation earlier from the Solicitor General, whom I have great respect for. She’s been around this House for a while. She said that it’s like a dimmer switch versus an on-and-off switch—that if the government wanted to move from a gathering of 10 people to a larger number, they couldn’t do it because it wouldn’t allow them under the current act. All they’d have to do is issue another order. You don’t have to do anything other than that. You don’t need the fiat of cabinet to deal with that.

Why is the government proposing under Bill 195 to give cabinet the ability to declare whatever state of emergency based on what they think is right or wrong without coming back to the Legislature?

What is this place for, Speaker? Of all people, as the guardian of the House, the Speaker of the Legislature, along with our Clerks and other staff, understand as much, if not more than all of us that this place is about having those debates.

Speaker, you and I have an admiration of a great parliamentarian by the name of Winston Churchill. In one of the books you loaned me, which I read and passed on to other members to read—because I think it’s important for people to understand that in the middle of the Second World War there were debates in the Legislature. The House of Commons debated what was actually going on. Every week, the Prime Minister would walk into the House in closed session—because they weren’t about to broadcast to the Germans exactly how badly the Allies were doing up until about 1942. We were in pretty bad shape.

But every week, the government would lay out how bad it was: We have lost here; we have lost there. We are down here. We don’t have the planes; we don’t have this; we don’t have this. They were laying it out for what it was because members of the House had a job to do, and their job was to listen to what the government was doing and to offer advice on possibly doing it differently.

And during the war, I think Parliament showed itself to be a really resilient body. If Britain came out of the Second World War as victors, it was largely because of the allies they had, such as ourselves, the Australians, the New Zealanders, the Americans and others, but a large part of it was that their own institution allowed them to survive because they trusted in themselves. They trusted in their institution and in being able to share information with elected officials so that elected officials could weigh in on what they thought had to be done.

The government listened, took the advice, or didn’t take the advice, and moved on. But at least people got heard and, in many cases, the advice was taken.

Well, what the government is saying with the proposition under Bill 195 is, “Cabinet will listen to itself. We will decide from what we hear from ourselves and we’ll make a decision because we know what’s best. Oh, and by the way, if you don’t think it’s a good decision, we’re going to give the Premier 30 minutes before a select committee for you to be able to ask him questions.” The government is going to have a majority on that committee. Do you think that if there’s anything controversial and the opposition decides to try to push the government on whatever, there’s going to be any listening going on?

Mr. Speaker, you were here during the time of the minority Parliament—the last minority, two or three Parliaments ago—where there was the gas plant committee. The only reason there was any light that came out of that was because that committee was not a majority committee for the government. As a result, the minority, being the opposition Conservatives and New Democrats, was able to get to the bottom of what happened in that particular story.

Was it embarrassing for the government? Absolutely. But this Parliament learned something from that, and the people learned something out of that, and as a result we changed laws in order to prevent that type of thing from happening again when it came to the type of interference the former Liberal administration did when it came to those gas plants. It changed public policy. That’s what this Legislature is all about, Mr. Speaker, as you know as well as I do. This is all about the House of the representatives being able to speak their minds when it comes to the issues of the day and being able to try to influence that decision.

But when the government says, “No, no, I’m mad because you were oppositional, you New Democrats; how dare you be oppositional to us,” and the response is, “Now we’re picking up our marbles and we’re going home and we’re not going to share with you any more what the agenda of the House is going to be,” that doesn’t tell me that you’re prepared to listen. That doesn’t tell me, Mr. Speaker—not you—that the government is prepared to listen.

Bill 195 is coming along, and Bill 195 is going to make these types of debates a thing of the past. The government will be able to extend emergency orders by order in cabinet—no checking in with the House. How is that better in any particular way? (

a) Is it better for the public? No, because they have a right to know. In this Legislature, part of what we do here by having public debates—they get to see us, warts and all. (

b) Is that what the Legislature is supposed to be about? Absolutely not. This Legislature is supposed to be consulted.

The biggest job that we have here as legislators is approving the budget, the monetary parts of what the government has to do, and approving legislation. That’s our job. And if any government—I don’t care what the stripe is—thinks they got it right the first time out and only they have all the answers by right of winning a majority government, I’ve got to say, Mr. Speaker, it’s a rather sad day in democracy when people actually believe that.

But unfortunately, it does happen, and it happens on all stripes; I’ll be fair to the government. “I got a majority, so therefore I know what has to be done.” No, it’s that you have a majority and you have the right to do what you believe, because parliamentary rules allow you to do that, but it doesn’t necessarily mean to say you’re right.

The government, I think, at least has to listen; it has to hear the argument. I don’t mean the argument—just by having a chat in the hallway or having to send an email to a minister so that hopefully the minister is going to listen to what an individual member would like to have changed in whatever is being proposed, or the public. This is the institution of the Parliament. This is what Parliament does.

Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, since you and I and Mr. Wilson got here some 30 years ago, the role of the Legislature is being diminished each and every day. You would have never seen something like Bill 195 brought to the House when you were elected, as well as me. It would have never been accepted by the public because the media was in a different space back then, and the members were in a different space as well. But what we’ve seen for 30 years by all hands of government is a continuing diminishment of the role of Parliament to a consolidation of power in the office of the Premier.

Is the Premier entitled to make decisions? Absolutely. By right of being able to appoint his or her cabinet members and by right of having a majority in the House, the Premier at the end of the day will always win, and so be it; that’s the way it should be. That’s how the parliamentary system was set up. It’s set up so that government in a four-year period can make something happen. You don’t have the deadlocked system that you have in the United States, where you’ve got one House that’s one party, the other House that’s the other party, and the twain shall never meet. Ask yourself the question, Mr.

Speaker: Why is it that there isn’t a public health care system in the United States? There are many answers to that question. But part of it is, their system makes it very difficult. It makes it extremely difficult for it to happen.

There are great parts about having majority governments, but there are also some very bad parts about having majority governments. By and large, it gives the government the ability to pass its agenda. But that has always been, Mr. Speaker, with a caveat, that even though the government feels that it’s right, it must come to the House and propose and debate what it is they’re trying to do and hear in the House, and eventually in committee, what the opposition and the public have to say.

Then the government can be judged by the public every four years—if what they judge to be the action that was required that they’ve taken is right or wrong. They will be judged by the public. The public are the ones, at the end of the day, who are going to make this decision.

What the government is trying to do, I believe, in the way that they’re governing, especially during this pandemic, is that they’re trying to outguess and stay ahead of everything and believe that they’re right all the time. Well, as they say, a clock is right twice a day. That’s the only guarantee that we have in life. Twice a day, it’s right. Sometimes the government is wrong. Sometimes the opposition is wrong, as well. But that’s what this place is all about—to have that discussion.

So I say to the government across the way, of course we’re going to support your legislation, as far as what you’re proposing here. But as I said, the first

part is that the government should be sharing its legislative agenda, its daily schedule, with us on a regular basis so that we know what’s going on. They should suggest to us what it is that we’re willing to work with them and what we’re not willing to work with them—agreeing on those things that we can agree on, disagreeing on those things that we don’t, and not taking it personally This is the Legislature, and I don’t take personally anything that the government does. It’s what they’re doing. It’s as simple as that. I may not like it, but I don’t take it personally.

I think that the government should take less personally what goes on around here and recognize that everybody has a role to play.

Maybe part of the problem is that some of the government members have never been in opposition. Some have been lucky to serve in government federally and provincially now. Some came here in government. I got here as a government member. You came here as an opposition member. It was a very different view about how this House should and did operate, based on where we sat.

I’ve been lucky, because I’m probably the only member to be able to say this: I’ve served in government, I’ve served in the third party, I’ve served in official opposition, and I’ve served without status, so I have a fairly good idea from all sides of the House how this place works and doesn’t work. When it does work is when we do have debate and we do have discussion, when the government listens and takes whatever advice they think is deemed fit to take and acts on it—and if they don’t, they don’t.

My colleague the member from Kitchener-Waterloo is going to share the rest of my time, and she has a few things she’d like to put on the record. I’m sure the government would like to say something, as well.

One of the numbers that was branded out by the government in this debate during the day and prior—they’re right; Ontario has done rather well when it comes to dealing with this pandemic. Some of it we can take credit for in this House; some of it the government can take credit for in the House, as well—but a large part of it is the public out there. Ontarians and Canadians are different than our friends to the south. We have a better understanding of what a public health care system is all about. I think that’s one of the key things that’s going on here.

Canadians understand that a public health care system is a system that works for all of the nation, not just some people. We’re more likely, as Canadians, to follow the directives of the officials within the Ministry of Health and the policy-makers in this Legislature and in cabinet and accept that—as are our counterparts to the south. So we’ve been more apt to follow the measures that have been suggested by the Chief Medical Officer of Health, the government and others about how we should do things in order to try t