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

May 3, 2018

41st Parliament, 3rd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcript 2018-May-03 (PDF)

L024 - Thu 3 May 2018 / Jeu 3 mai 2018

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Thursday 3 May 2018 Jeudi 3 mai 2018

Orders of the Day

Government Contract Wages Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur les salaires pour les marchés publics

Correctional Services Transformation Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur la transformation des services correctionnels

Introduction of Visitors

Oral Questions

Pharmacare

Government accounting practices

Public transit

Long-term care

Energy policies

Autism treatment

Greenbelt

Cancer treatment

Water quality

Clean technology

Special-needs children

Soins à domicile / Home care

Transportation planning

Child protection

Child care

Visitors

Deferred Votes

Government Contract Wages Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur les salaires pour les marchés publics

Correctional Services Transformation Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur la transformation des services correctionnels

Introduction of Visitors

Members’ Statements

Hospice care

Legislative staff

Sports in Beaches–East York

Transportation planning

Injured workers

Visitors

Member for Guelph

Public transit

Durham College

Reports by Committees

Standing Committee on Public Accounts

Standing Committee on Public Accounts

Standing Committee on Finance and Economic Affairs

Introduction of Bills

Highway Traffic Amendment Act (Memorial Cross Number Plates), 2018 / Loi de 2018 modifiant le Code de la route (plaques d’immatriculation ornées de la Croix du souvenir)

Small Business Construction Survival Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur la survie des petites entreprises aux travaux de construction

Petitions

Doctor shortage

Long-term care

Environmental protection

Landfill

Correctional services

Environmental protection

Family Responsibility Office

Pharmacare

Environmental protection

Automobile insurance

Anti-smoking initiatives for youth

Private Members’ Public Business

Mandatory Sexual Assault Law Training for Judicial Officers Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur la formation obligatoire des fonctionnaires judiciaires en droit relatif aux agressions sexuelles

Combatting Eating Disorders in Ontario Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur la lutte contre les troubles alimentaires en Ontario

Respecting Municipal Authority Over Landfilling Sites Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur le respect des pouvoirs des municipalités à l’égard des lieux d’enfouissement

Mandatory Sexual Assault Law Training for Judicial Officers Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur la formation obligatoire des fonctionnaires judiciaires en droit relatif aux agressions sexuelles

Combatting Eating Disorders in Ontario Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur la lutte contre les troubles alimentaires en Ontario

Respecting Municipal Authority Over Landfilling Sites Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur le respect des pouvoirs des municipalités à l’égard des lieux d’enfouissement

Report, Office of the Integrity Commissioner

The House met at 0900.

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

Prayers.

Orders of the Day

Government Contract Wages Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur les salaires pour les marchés publics

Resuming the debate adjourned on April 30, 2018, on the motion for second reading of the following bill:

Bill 53,

An Act respecting the establishment of minimum government contract wages / Projet de loi 53, Loi concernant la fixation de salaires minimums pour les marchés publics.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Pursuant to the order of the House dated May 2, 2018, I’m now required to put the question.

Mr. Flynn has moved second reading of Bill 53,

An Act respecting the establishment of minimum government contract wages. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry? I heard a no.

All those in favour, please say “aye.”

All those opposed, please say “nay.”

In my opinion, the ayes have it.

The recorded vote being required will be deferred until question period today.

Second reading vote deferred.

Correctional Services Transformation Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur la transformation des services correctionnels

Resuming the debate adjourned on April 30, 2018, on the motion for third reading of the following bill:

Bill 6,

An Act to enact the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services Act, 2018 and the Correctional Services and Reintegration Act, 2018, to make related amendments to other Acts, to repeal

an Act and to revoke a regulation / Projet de loi 6, Loi édictant la Loi de 2018 sur le ministère de la Sécurité communautaire et des Services correctionnels et la Loi de 2018 sur les services correctionnels et la réinsertion sociale, apportant des modifications connexes à d’autres lois et abrogeant une loi et un règlement.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Further debate?

Hon. Marie-France Lalonde: C’est vraiment un plaisir to continue third reading debate on the Correctional Services Transformation Act, 2018.

This proposed legislation represents one of the largest steps in the transformation and modernization of adult correctional services in Ontario in generations. It will help to ensure that the changes we make are the right ones and that Ontario will be seen as a leader in correctional services across the country and around the world. We are determined to make our communities safer while putting fewer people behind bars. This large-scale reform is just one part of a much bigger picture.

Correctional transformation, at its core, is about making sure the people who need help get help, and making sure that those caught up in the criminal justice system are diverted away from our institutions whenever possible. Our government is committed to addressing complex underlying social needs by investing in social infrastructure. These investments can keep people from becoming involved with the criminal justice system in the first place.

At the same time, Madam Speaker, we have to recognize the immediate and pressing needs of those who are in our custody—people who are in our institutions right now. We must provide those in our custody and care with the supports and services they need to re-enter their communities rehabilitated and ready to become contributing members of society. Nothing could make our communities safer.

Since it was introduced, there have been many changes made to this bill. I’m going to touch on a few of them. There were actually 113 government amendments dealt with during the clause-by-clause review. As you know, I only have 30 minutes so I’ll touch on a few of them.

OPSEU had concerns about the bill’s proposed use-of-force standard, searches of letters and strip searches. There were also concerns about the proposed offence provisions in

section 127 of the bill. I’m happy to say that the government put forward amendments to adopt their suggested changes, and

section 127 was removed from the proposed legislation entirely. We listened, we thought carefully about the points raised, and we made the changes.

I also listened as many of the members opposite railed against this bill; yet they only managed to propose two amendments. Perhaps this bill was never the disaster they made it out to be.

There are parts of the bill that are of particular interest to community corrections staff: protecting probation and parole officers from any future government privatization attempts; the parole board’s hearings and consideration processes; and the updated duties of probation and parole officers.

First, Bill 6 would prohibit the ministry from entering into a contract or agreement to have a correctional institution operated by a private, for-profit entity, to prevent another disaster like a previous government’s experiment with privately run correctional institutions. The bill recognizes the value of our public correctional system and would put in place measures to keep it public. That includes probation and parole officers who, as in the current act, will remain public sector employees.

We also made amendments to more accurately reflect the modern role of our front-line community services staff. The term “probation officer” has been replaced by “probation and parole officer” throughout the bill, and we have added new language to more fully reflect the scope of work and the range of reporting, supervision, programming, correctional intervention and client support services that our probation and parole officers provide. It was nice to see that one of the two amendments proposed by the opposition parties related to the duties of a probation and parole officer.

Finally, we passed an amendment to allow more flexibility in the parole process. Currently, inmates sentenced to over six months who waive their parole hearing in writing are still considered for parole. That means a significant amount of paperwork for PPOs. I have spoken to numerous PPOs, Madam Speaker, who have raised concerns about the current process.

Our amendments provide legislative flexibility that could allow a significant number of inmates to choose to waive both their parole hearings and their parole consideration, allowing our existing PPOs and the 100 new PPOs we are committed to hiring to focus more of their time and energies on client supervision and support rather than paperwork.

Madam Speaker, this proposed legislation is based on the cornerstones of safety, human rights, dignity, and the strength of our correctional services family. Correctional staff, including correctional officers and probation and parole officers, are essential partners in the work already under way to transform Ontario’s adult correctional system. I want to thank our correctional staff for the vital role they play and for their support and encouragement as we build a more effective and responsive correctional system.

Mr. Lorne Coe: Speaker, point of order.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Soo Wong): I’m going to turn to the member for Whitby–Oshawa.

Mr. Lorne Coe: It appears that we do not have a quorum.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Soo Wong): I’m going to check with the Clerk for a quorum.

The Clerk-at-the-Table (Mr. William Short): A quorum is now present, Speaker.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Soo Wong): Okay. I’ll return back to the minister.

Hon. Marie-France Lalonde: As I was saying—during this wonderful intervention for a quorum—I want to say thank you to our correctional staff for the vital role they play, as I said, and for their support and encouragement as we build a more effective and responsive correctional system.

I look forward, Madam Speaker, to celebrating our outstanding corrections staff on Monday during the annual correctional services awards ceremony. Every year, I hear remarkable stories of bravery, exceptional achievement, stories of staff building a more inclusive and sharing workplace, and of staff performing outstanding charitable service. The experiences and opinions on the front line have been instrumental in the development of this important and transformative legislation, in the changes we make—and will continue to make—to renew the correctional system in Ontario.

Our front-line staff, their local representatives and our community stakeholders said we need to do things differently, and that’s what we plan to do. The Correctional Services Transformation Act will have a significant impact on the way we do business and on outcomes for people and communities all over the province. Those who arrive at our institutions, or who are under community supervision, often face complex social issues, including physical and mental health challenges, addictions, homelessness and unemployment. Our goal is to not only improve supports within corrections but also to help people avoid repeated involvement within the justice system.

This will be accomplished by building a corrections system:

—where we segregate less and phase out segregation for our most vulnerable inmates entirely;

—where we ease the pressure on community services after discharge by addressing the health care needs of inmates while in custody;

—where corrections and outside professionals are more engaged at every step of an individual’s care and well-being, from admission to discharge, and where our staff are positive role models for the road ahead;

—where we protect the rights of people under the Ontario Human Rights Code, especially First Nations, Inuit and Métis people;

—where efforts are made to reverse the trend of over-representation of certain populations in our institutions; and

—where programs will be offered that inmates can truly relate to, reducing the risk to reoffend.

What I have described is a correctional system that is dedicated to reintegration and rehabilitation—

Mr. Sam Oosterhoff: Point of order, Speaker.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Soo Wong): I’m going to turn to the member from Niagara West–Glanbrook.

Mr. Sam Oosterhoff: Speaker, I don’t believe we have quorum.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Soo Wong): I’m going to turn to the Clerk.

The Clerk-at-the-Table (Mr. William Short): Quorum is present, Speaker.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Soo Wong): It is present. I’m going to turn to the minister again.

Hon. Marie-France Lalonde: Thank you for keeping quorum, my young man.

What I have described, Madam Speaker, is a correctional system that is dedicated to reintegration and rehabilitation through individual case management, supportive services, education, job training and rehabilitative programs. It is dedicated to ensuring that health and mental health supports are in place should they be needed; to treating those in our care and custody with respect; to finding evidence-based alternatives to outdated practices, like the overuse of segregation; and to having a network in place to bridge to a smooth and successful reintegration back into their home community. These are the signature pieces of a modern correctional system.

There are challenges we need to overcome:

—the overuse of segregation;

—the improvement of living conditions;

—over-representation of racialized populations in our institutions; and

—renewal of a correctional infrastructure that is old and, in many instances, well past its useful life.

The proposed Correctional Services Transformation Act will address each of these challenges and will pave the path forward for the correctional services of the future.

Reforming segregation is an essential piece of my ministry’s correctional transformation. Our goal is to create a system that has the appropriate supports and services in place so we can arrive at a day where we no longer require the use of segregation. Until we arrive at that day, inmates being held in segregation will have the same rights to humane treatment as all other inmates in the institution.

This act will enable us to build a more secure and humane correctional system that segregates less; one where an inmate’s health and mental health comes first. With a standardized definition of segregation—centred on the experience of the inmates and not on the physical space they occupy—we are also setting the stage for improved data collection and better tracking and monitoring of those in segregation. This was one of the biggest concerns raised by the Ontario Ombudsman and the Ontario Human Rights Commission, and we are determined to fix it.

At the same time that we introduce a new definition of segregation, we will start to prohibit segregation for vulnerable inmates. In addition to taking vulnerable inmates out of segregation, we will phase in time restrictions and limitations on how long an inmate can remain in segregation. Where segregation is necessary today, our focus is on improving conditions and ensuring that inmates have social interaction and access to physical and mental health services, as well as reading materials, educational programs and increased access to chaplaincy and other spiritual care, such as indigenous elders.

We must all do more to improve the living conditions of all inmates in our care and custody, not just those in segregation. The act proposes minimum living conditions for all inmates, which was one of the key recommendations made by Mr. Howard Sapers, Ontario’s Independent Advisor on Corrections Reform.

The new act also aims to address the overrepresentation of indigenous people and racialized populations in our institutions. The ministry has no control over who comes into our custody and very little sway over the length of their stay, Madam Speaker. Those decisions rest with the courts and with the Ontario Parole Board. But we can and will have control over the services that individuals receive while in custody or under community supervision and the supports needed for successful reintegration back to the community.

Evidence-based programs and supportive services are essential for the rehabilitation and reintegration of clients. Rehabilitative programs that do not connect with the audience represent a wasted opportunity. By introducing rehabilitation programs that inmates can relate to, we have the greatest potential to reduce the risk of recidivism. The proposed act will require that all rehabilitative, general and work programs account for the diverse and unique needs of the inmate population, with a strong focus on the need of overrepresented groups.

Our government is proposing one of the largest transformations in the history of Ontario’s adult correctional services. This transformation will require a higher level of oversight and accountability, and the proposed act creates that framework. Actually, Madam Speaker, you, MPP Wong, outlined this framework on Monday. It included the creation of an independent inspector general, independent review panels, a chief of inspections to review employee code of conduct and security-related matters, and disciplinary hearing officers to conduct hearings and make decisions regarding allegations of serious acts of misconduct by inmates.

The renewal of corrections infrastructure is another major piece in our transformation of corrections. The eventual elimination of segregation, improvements in conditions of confinement, and the expansion of programming and reintegration supports for inmates cannot be accomplished within Ontario’s existing correctional infrastructure. We will renovate many of our institutions to add programming space, better visiting areas and improved mental health areas. And we are building new institutions in Thunder Bay and Ottawa, as well as a new secure women’s treatment facility, that will serve as models for innovation and renewal.

This new approach will drive reform by taking a holistic view of a correctional facility, going beyond the bricks and mortar and engaging staff, justice and community partners to create a venue for rehabilitation that supports better outcomes for those in our care and custody. These new facilities will be the first pieces of correctional services infrastructure to be built under the new transformation framework.

I want to have a moment also to reflect and touch on an issue that is very important to me and to our front-line correctional staff: managing inmates’ behaviour and reducing violent assault within our institutions. Since I became minister in January 2017, I have been made aware of several very serious assaults on inmates and on front-line staff. There are significant concerns arising from the statistics coming out of our institutions. The numbers I have seen suggest a deeply disturbing trend. So I want to announce today that we are taking immediate steps to address these issues.

We are enhancing institutional safety by implementing additional field intelligence officers and new institutional security teams at four new institutions. We will expand the number of institutional security teams from three to seven by adding 16 new officers, and we will deploy 10 new field intelligence officers on the front lines in institutions.

These resources will enhance the ministry’s capacity to gather intelligence; strengthen relationships with local law enforcement agencies; enhance security through proactive detection, monitoring and seizure of contraband; and manage gang members within institutions. We must consistently work to increase the safety of our staff and clients. These new resources will help us achieve our goals.

Also, I have requested independent analysis and advice regarding violence within institutions and the management of inmates’ behaviour in assaults from Mr. Howard Sapers, who, as I mentioned earlier, is Ontario’s Independent Advisor on Corrections Reform. We need an in-depth understanding of what is happening in our institutions and, more importantly, what is driving the trend. We need a better understanding of how and why we collect statistics. We need to ensure that our data is accurate and appropriate and we must identify measures that can be implemented to protect our staff and our inmates by reducing the level of violence in our institutions.

I have asked that, should he take on my request, his work be undertaken in consultation and collaboration with our front-line staff and their elected representatives. Their knowledge and experience is the key to understand the issues within our institutions and to identify and implement solutions.

Finally, I have requested that Mr. Sapers deliver an initial report within 90 days. I look forward to continuing to work with Mr. Sapers and our front-line staff as we move forward with correctional transformation.

With the passage of the Correctional Services Transformation Act, our government will take a bold and significant step to realize our vision for modernized corrections in Ontario. It is the foundation needed to eventually eliminate segregation, to make our institutions safer for both staff and inmates, and to provide the supports that those in our care and custody need for rehabilitation and for successful reintegration into the community.

I ask that the House pass this bill so that we can enter the next phase of the transformation of our correctional system.

What a fitting time to look to the future. On Monday, we will unveil the new correctional workers’ monument. This monument is a permanent tribute to past and present. To those who served and to those who serve still, and to the sacrifices they have made and continue to make. It is a symbol of the hard work and of the reality that all sworn officers working in corrections live every day. This monument can also represent an historic turning point in the future of Ontario’s correctional services with the passing of this bill today.

I want to say thank you very much to all of our front-line workers; to my predecessor, Minister Orazietti, and Minister Naqvi, who have taken this challenge in bringing in Mr. Howard Sapers; and to everyone in our offices who have worked very hard in bringing forward this transformative piece of legislation.

Madame la Présidente, merci beaucoup de votre écoute.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Soo Wong): Further debate?

M me France Gélinas: I’m glad I will have a few minutes to put a few thoughts on the record. I will be quoting quite a bit from a report that was done by the John Howard Society; more specifically, the Sudbury John Howard Society. I want to thank their executive director, Mr. John Rimore, for, I would say, educating me on the topic that pertains to this bill.

The part of the bill that I would like to talk about has to do with the health care needs of the inmates and the need for changes to the way that we provide health care to inmates. Basically, this is an opportunity for transformation. I would like the House to use this opportunity to transform the health care services that are available to the people that are being incarcerated; more specifically, that the responsibility for the health care services that are delivered be delivered by the Ministry of Health, not by the ministry of corrections. I will explain the difference that that would bring.

Most of the suggestions that I will be talking about come from a report that was presented during deputations on this bill by the John Howard Society of Ontario, called Fractured Care: Public Health Opportunities in Ontario’s Correctional Institutions. It is also mentioned quite heavily in Howard Sapers’s paper called Segregation in Ontario, which was tabled in March 2017; as well as his second paper, Corrections in Ontario: Directions for Reform, which was tabled in September 2017 and which is the basis for the bill.

We all understand that sometimes it is necessary for people that have done wrong to be sentenced to time spent in jail. It’s important to understand that incarceration is the punishment that is used for individuals whose crime against another person or persons are of such magnitude that a period of time away from society, with restrictions on the person’s ability to be in the community, is warranted. So this is what the judge gives: It gives a person that has done wrong a time to be locked up in a jail, as this is the punishment.

But that doesn’t mean that all of the rights of a person are taken away. The rights of an Ontarian to have access to care if they have health care needs cannot be taken away because somebody is being put in jail. The example that I often use is that a judge never sentences someone to blindness; a judge never sentences someone to leg amputation—never, ever. A judge sentences someone to be locked up in jail for what their crime is. But right now, it is up to the Ministry of Correctional Services to decide protocol for medication.

There is a huge, disproportionate amount of First Nations people in the Sudbury Jail. I have been there many times, and the statistics are still there. The statistics also tell us that close to one in two have diabetes—diabetes that is sometimes diagnosed, sometimes being treated with insulin injections, and otherwise being treated with different medications. Stories of inmates coming out of the Sudbury Jail—and jails all over—would tell us that it takes days, sometimes weeks, before they have access to their medication.

You know very well, Speaker, that if diabetes goes untreated for days, weeks at a time, a lot of damage happens during that time. The food is often not very appropriate for people that have diabetes. They have no way of testing their blood glucose to see, but they can feel it. I remember testing some of them off the street who would have a blood glucose of 27. We would retest it three times to say, “How can you still be walking around?” This is what’s happening in our jails.

During all of that time, damage is done through neuropathy to their eyes, to their blood circulation. A lot of First Nations people who have been incarcerated, who have diabetes, do not receive the care they need. Then, shortly thereafter, blindness sets in. Shortly thereafter, foot ulcers develop that lead to foot amputation and sometimes lower limb amputation. The judge never sentenced them to blindness. The judge never sentenced them to amputation. This would be barbaric; nobody would accept that. But, really, this is what’s happening to our inmates right now in Ontario.

The health care that is available to all Ontarians has to be available to people who are incarcerated. How do we make this happen? We make this happen by making sure that the Ministry of Health is in charge of the health care services that are delivered to our jails. Right now it is not, and I would say that basic human rights are being violated. The reports that were made that inform this bill spoke about this clearly. There’s still a chance. The bill certainly is not written up to help it, but it could be interpreted to help. It could be interpreted that we do regulations that say that from now on, the Ministry of Health is in charge of it all.

If an inmate is pregnant, we don’t expect the jail guards or the limited staff to do the delivery. We send her to a hospital or a midwife so that she can have the right care that she needs. If an inmate needs active cancer treatment, we don’t expect the jail to provide this. We link them up. Sure, they continue to be incarcerated, but they have access to those services. But when it comes to medication, when it comes to diabetes and when it comes to mental illness, we expect jail guards, we expect people working part-time in our correctional facilities, to become mental health experts, to become diabetes experts, to become experts in all sorts of diseases that they are not.

It should be the Ministry of Health who recruits and retains the people who work within our jails, who supervise them, who make sure that they have the right amount of support from the rest of the health care system so that they are able to meet the needs of the people who are incarcerated.

When it comes to mental health, we should be sending a whole lot less people with mental illness to our jails.

The first time I toured the Sudbury Jail, I had just been recently elected. I come from the health care system. I was the executive director of our community health centre. We ran the Corner Clinic for the homeless. When I walked into the Sudbury Jail for the first time, I knew 90% of the guys who were in there. I knew their diagnostics because they were clients of ours. I would say that at least 80% of the people who were in there had a diagnostic of severe mental illness. They should not be in there. This is the worst possible environment for them, and yet this is still going on. This has to change, Speaker.

Through this bill, we have an opportunity to change this, to make sure that people with mental illness—the core reason why they did something wrong was because of an illness.

We should make sure that we have, at a minimum, community-based services so we can give people the care they need in the community. We should have strict supervision of those who are convicted so that their mental illness does not get worse. We should make sure that we have safe, affordable environments for accommodation.

Let’s be proactive in health promotion and disease prevention so that people don’t end up in jail and so that if they have a mental illness that basically forces them to act out, they don’t end up in jail.

The same thing happens with young people who start to consume marijuana or other street drugs. They are at a time in their lives, through adolescence, that is sometimes challenging. We’ve had three kids of our own go through adolescence, and they’ve come with their loads of challenges—and good times, but it could be challenging. And then you have all of the behaviour changes that come with some of those young people who start to consume illegal drugs and get addicted. There is no treatment facility. There is one, Pine River, that exists for all of our province. In northern Ontario, there are none that exist, and then those young people end up in the corrections system.

They should never be there, Speaker; never, ever. A kid experimenting with street drugs and getting addicted should be getting treatment right away, as soon as the family reaches out. They should not be put on an 18-month wait-list for the first time that they’ll get to see a counsellor. There’s so much more we could do. This bill opens the door for us to do the right thing, and I certainly hope that we will do this.

As I said, a lot of this could be easily addressed for the better if we make the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care the only one responsible for providing care to everyone. The judge will hand out the punishment, and people will get incarcerated. This is the punishment, but because your address is now the Sudbury Jail or any other jail in the province, it should not be that you don’t have access to the health care system that is there.

History has shown us, over and over, that the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services does not have the capacity or the authority to ensure that rehabilitative programs and services are offered to incarcerated individuals in the same way that they are offered in the community, that addictions programming and counselling is there.

I would even add vision care to this. Lots of people wear glasses. If you look around—I don’t know what percentage of the population wears glasses, but a lot of people do. If your vision is poor, you will need glasses when you’re in jail, but if for one reason or another you ended up going in there without your glasses, you will spend the entire time not able to read, not able to see properly, because none of them will have access to an optometrist to check their eyes and give them a new pair of glasses. Why do we do this?

The person was not sentenced to going without seeing for the next six months or whatever the jail term is. The punishment was to be incarcerated, not to suddenly lose all of your rights to have access to health care.

I also want to talk about how we best support the health care professionals working in the provincial corrections system. Some of the topic, as I said, has to do with recruiting and retaining health care professionals. Some of it is ensuring that staff have appropriate supports and resources, that we have the appropriate makeup for correctional health care teams. Sometimes a social worker, a psychologist, people with knowledge of mental health would be very helpful to have in our jails. We also look at how we make sure that they are getting access to off-site specialty health professionals, and how we make sure that there are reporting structures, oversight and independence.

When we look at the bill right now, the Ministry of Correctional Services continues to have a veto over whatever a health care professional has prescribed for someone. How could that be? The judge punished the person to incarceration—that’s it; that’s all. The judge never said that your needs for health care would also be taken away. This is wrong. It has to change. This bill opens the door to do this, but we have to take the further step so that it happens.

I will say it and will keep repeating it: The Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care should be the one and only government ministry that controls all of the health care needs of incarcerated individuals. It should be the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care that recruits, trains, ensures diversity in the multidisciplinary team and ensures access to outside professionals. Going forward, the clinical independence of health care professionals in correctional services will naturally occur, because it’s not happening right now.

The support that the ministry of corrections is giving to our health care professionals right now—there are some really good nurses who work there, some of them I know personally. One has been there for a very long time. He is very good at what he does, but he has very, very limited means to work with the support that the ministry of corrections is giving to those health care professionals who work in corrections facilities. The best way I can describe it, Speaker, is that it’s non-existent.

I can share the story that was given by a formerly incarcerated individual, where he had less than five minutes to speak to medical staff, who were only in the facility for a few hours a few times a week, although this person had a number of chronic, severe illnesses that needed to be managed, that needed medication. For some of those chronic illnesses, the medication never came, causing his health to deteriorate significantly.

The ministry that controls the health care needs of incarcerated individuals, including the hiring and the retention, has to be the Ministry of Health. It cannot continue to be the Ministry of Correctional Services. If we leave it the way it is, we will continue to deny people access to health care services. That will have a detrimental impact on their lives, sometimes on the quality of their lives, for the rest of their lives. This is not on, Speaker; we cannot continue down the path that we have.

I know that the bill goes on to do a number of other transformations in our jails, some of them being well documented and supported. The part about opening the door to privatization of our jails certainly was worrisome for all of us, but if we are going to transform jails, we have to take this opportunity to really refocus as to what our jails are there for.

Jail is a sentence that a judge gives to take away people’s freedom, to lock them up away from society. This is what the punishment is. The punishment is never to make people sick, to not treat people with diabetes so they end up blind or with foot amputations. It is never okay, including for people who live in our jails.

I thank you, Speaker, for allowing me to put those few thoughts on the record.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Soo Wong): Further debate?

Pursuant to the order of the House dated April 12, 2018, I am now required to put the question.

Mrs. Albanese has moved third reading of Bill 6,

An Act to enact the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services Act, 2018 and the Correctional Services and Reintegration Act, 2018, to make related amendments to other Acts, to repeal

an Act and to revoke a regulation. Is it the pleasure of the House that the motion carry?

All those in favour of the motion, please say “aye.”

All those opposed to the motion, please say “nay.”

In my opinion, the ayes have it. I believe there’s going to be a recorded vote. I will defer it until after question period.

Third reading vote deferred.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Soo Wong): Orders of the day? Minister of Research, Innovation and Science.

Hon. Reza Moridi: Thank you, Madam Speaker. No further business.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Soo Wong): We will recess the House until 10:30.

The House recessed from 0945 until 1030.

Introduction of Visitors

Mr. Lou Rinaldi: I’d like to welcome Bruce and Marlene Wood from the great riding of Northumberland–Quinte West. Welcome.

Mr. Bob Delaney: On behalf of the member from Cambridge, who will arrive shortly, and on behalf of page Madeline Buss, I’d like to introduce the page’s aunt, Lisa Maavara, and uncle, Gary Maavara. They will be in the members’ gallery this morning. Please welcome them.

Mr. Raymond Sung Joon Cho: I’m very, very happy to introduce leaders from the Korean community. We have the president of the Korean Canadian Cultural Association, Daniel Lee; Jae Chong, vice-president; and Mr. Kong. I’m very happy; welcome to Queen’s Park.

Ms. Sophie Kiwala: I would like to extend a very warm welcome to Joey Ranieri, an IT application developer from this House. Welcome to question period.

Hon. David Zimmer: I, too, would like to introduce our Korean guests from the Korean Canadian Cultural Association and Hanca Korean seniors’ association: Jae Chong, Daniel Lee, Young Sil Lee, Will Cho, Jang Hun Kong and Pok Yeong Kim; from my own office, Michelle Kim; and from the Ministry of Health’s office, Lilian Kim.

But I want to say why I’m introducing them. These two Korean groups were very active in organizing vigils in Willowdale as a result of last week’s tragedy. They did a tremendous amount of work both—

Applause.

Hon. David Zimmer: They worked closely with the Korean community. There were three Koreans who were killed. They also worked closely with the other communities here in Toronto and in Willowdale. It was a cross-ethnic approach. Thank you.

Hon. Indira Naidoo-Harris: I’d like to welcome to Queen’s Park some students from my riding from Bishop Reding high school in Milton. They don’t appear to be here just yet, but I’d like to wish them all a very strong welcome to Queen’s Park.

Hon. Mitzie Hunter: I want to give a warm welcome to the Legislature to a school from my riding, Cedarbrae Collegiate, and their teacher. They’re somewhere touring this morning, and I want to give them a warm welcome.

I also would like to welcome a student who is here from the University of Toronto observing all of us this morning. It’s Mobolu Coker. I want to welcome her to Queen’s Park as well.

Mr. Lorne Coe: I would like to welcome the students, teachers and parents from St. John the Evangelist school in my riding.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): We do have a guest in the Speaker’s gallery today, and she is the press gallery intern for the summertime at Queen’s Park: Rhianna Jackson-Kelso. Welcome, Rhianna.

Oral Questions

Pharmacare

Mr. Jeff Yurek: Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care.

Victoria Vigneau posted a moving video this week about her struggle. She has cystic fibrosis, and Victoria needs Orkambi. Why won’t this government fund the medicine Victoria needs?

Hon. Helena Jaczek: Of course, we empathize with those patients with cystic fibrosis and we know that they and their families certainly struggle with the debilitating effects of this disease. We know that they hope that each new drug that may be available could be promising for their particular case, so we certainly empathize with these families and these individuals. We are committed to finding solutions.

But of course, we have taken the politics out of drug funding. We rely on experts to determine which drugs are funded and we rely on the best medical evidence available. As with all new drugs, we need to know how it will provide patients with better health outcomes; we need to study potential side effects that could be harmful. We therefore rely on experts and on the best medical advice available to determine which drugs are funded.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Jeff Yurek: Back to the minister: Victoria has said the Premier won’t take a meeting. She has said the Premier won’t take a call. She has said the Premier won’t even answer her emails. Why is the Premier ignoring Victoria and the life-saving medication she needs?

Hon. Helena Jaczek: As I have said, we have taken the politics out of this particular area when we’re dealing with new drugs and their potential to help Ontarians. We do know that Orkambi will be reviewed again under the national Common Drug Review process in the coming months—I’ve been assured that this will happen in July—to see if the experts find enough evidence of clinical effectiveness to recommend it for public funding.

In the meantime, we will continue to provide the care that individuals need, to provide cystic fibrosis patients with the current best available treatments, because we know that that kind of care has been shown to improve their condition and their quality of life.

As I have said, all drugs go through a pan-Canadian expert committee which undertakes a thorough evaluation based on the best available evidence.

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

Mr. Jeff Yurek: The pan-Canadian review committee has dropped the ball and has created such a bureaucratic process that kids cannot access the medications they need—life-saving medications.

Mr. Speaker, back to the minister: Why is the Premier letting Victoria suffer and fight for every breath she takes? As Jerry Agar said today, is the Premier okay with letting Victoria die?

Hon. Helena Jaczek: I would like to emphasize that we care for all Ontarians and provide the best available health care in this province.

The fact of the matter is, the Canadian Drug Expert Committee did review Orkambi in 2016 for patients aged 12 years and older, and the review raised concerns about Orkambi’s lack of clinical effectiveness, so the drug was not recommended for public funding. We know countries such as England, Scotland and Australia also do not provide public coverage for this drug.

The manufacturer was encouraged to resubmit Orkambi to the Common Drug Review if they had new evidence of clinical effectiveness, and we know that they did make a resubmission to the CDR in February. The Canadian Drug Expert Committee will be reviewing it again in July.

We’re constantly working to fund more evidence-based medicines and so we have through the years included, as an example, Kalydeco, a life-saving cystic fibrosis drug. This was an example where we took the politics out of this process and approved a drug.

Government accounting practices

Ms. Sylvia Jones: My question is to the Acting Premier. Both the Auditor General and the Financial Accountability Officer have released reports in the past weeks showing the Liberal government has misrepresented the true state of the province’s finances. And they aren’t quibbling over pennies. The Financial Accountability Officer—

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Excuse me. I’m going to ask the member to really guard her words in what she’s saying. She was borderline unparliamentary. If it comes again, I’m going to ask her to withdraw.

Ms. Sylvia Jones: We aren’t quibbling over pennies. The Financial Accountability Officer is reporting the 2018 deficit to be more than $12 billion. That’s twice what the finance minister is projecting. The Liberal government has called this an accounting dispute. I believe the auditor and the Financial Accountability Officer.

When will the government come clean and amend their deficit forecast for 2018?

Hon. Yasir Naqvi: The Minister of Finance.

Hon. Charles Sousa: Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the question. I also appreciate the work done by the FAO and the Auditor General. They’ve both reaffirmed that we have taken a very cautious and reasonable approach in our assumptions going forward. The FAO has reinforced that some of the progressive measures that we put on will have a profound positive impact on our society as well.

The Auditor General has cited two issues, and the FAO has assumed them in his estimates going forward. Both of these two issues—the pension assets that are jointly sponsored by the government, as well as the fair hydro plan that enables us to reduce rates by 25% on the ratepayer base—are being disputed by the auditor and professional accountants, both internally and externally. We recognize that dispute, but we’re not going to weigh in on it. What we’re going to do is continue to foster investments that grow our economy and support the people of Ontario.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Ms. Sylvia Jones: What is the point of having an Auditor General and a Financial Accountability Officer if you don’t listen to them?

When the Liberal government came to power in 2003, Ontario’s debt was $139 billion. In less than 15 years, we’ve watched Ontario’s debt balloon to over $300 billion. If we stay on the Liberal path of deficit spending, Ontario’s debt to GDP—already at 40%—will exceed 45%—twice Bob Rae’s legacy.

Again I ask the minister: Will you finally admit that the Auditor General and the Financial Accountability Officer are right, and amend your financial numbers to reflect that this year’s deficit will be over $12 billion?

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you. I would like the member from Guelph to relax.

Minister of Finance.

Hon. Charles Sousa: Mr. Speaker, the member opposite is now disputing the integrity of our civil service and the professional accountants internally who have signed off on these measures.

The member is now also disputing the chair of the Canadian Accounting Standards Board on accounting principles—who has also provided an opinion on the matter, saying that the very pension assets that the auditor is now disputing are the very same assets that she audited and approved only years ago and has for the past 20 years, even when the Conservatives were in power.

Furthermore, the issues around the fair hydro plan around rate-regulated accounting—it is in fact permissible, even today, in this government in other areas, as well as other parts of Canada and the United States.

We have taken their advice. We have made a policy decision to provide supports for the people of Ontario, and we’ve been very open and have disclosed. In fact, investors around the world are investing in these very measures. OPG, which cites that debt very clearly on their books, has a clean audit and it is approved by our auditor as well, Mr. Speaker. Nothing is hidden—

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

Ms. Sylvia Jones: Spin it all you want, Minister. The Financial Accountability Officer and the Auditor General don’t believe you, and neither do we.

The FAO reports that the government spending plan will add $70 billion to the province’s net debt, increasing it to almost $400 billion in 2021. FAO chief economist David West said that at a basic level, the government’s current spending levels are unsustainable. But that’s not the only word people have used to describe the books. Deterioration, dangerous precedent, unlikely assumptions, unreliable, distorted, bogus: That’s just a small selection of the words used. That is your legacy.

Do the right thing. Update your deficit numbers to reflect the $12-billion deficit.

Hon. Charles Sousa: Here’s our legacy, Mr. Speaker: We lead Canada, Europe and the United States in economic growth. We balanced the budget. We have a $600-million surplus and the lowest unemployment in two decades. We have the top destination of foreign direct investment, and Canada is doing well. Our public accounts, which are the actual results of the year, have proven that we’ve balanced the budget and have a surplus.

DBRS and Moody’s have affirmed our AA rating, and DBRS says it’s stable, Mr. Speaker.

The FAO has made projections every year. Each time this government exceeded targets. We are now doing better than we’ve ever done. We’re continuing to make life more affordable for the people of Ontario.

Interjections.

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

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Okay. The member from Simcoe–Grey and the President of the Treasury Board are warned.

New question.

Public transit

Mr. Peter Tabuns: My question is to the Acting Premier. The Ontario government used to fund 50% of transit net operating costs, in a successful funding formula that ensured high-quality service. This funding was cut by the Conservatives, and it stayed cut under the Liberals. Municipalities and transit advocates, like TTC riders, have repeatedly asked for this funding to be restored. Why has the Premier repeatedly refused?

Hon. Yasir Naqvi: To the Minister of Economic Development and Growth on behalf of the Minister of Transportation.

Hon. Steven Del Duca: I thank the member for his question. I know that he and others in the NDP caucus have raised this a number of times over the last couple of years. What they fail to comprehend in the way they ask their question is that this government is investing more in public transit infrastructure in the city of Toronto and across the greater Toronto and Hamilton area—and in every community across Ontario that has public transit—more so than any other government in Ontario history.

In fact, just a number of months ago, we started to double the amount of gas tax money that the communities that are supporting public transit themselves locally receive. Over the next couple of years, that gas tax funding—to specifically support expanding public transit and support public transit service in those communities—will double. This is a significant step forward with respect to supporting those communities in their transit needs, while at the same time we continue to invest in infrastructure.

I’ll be delighted to provide more details on that in the follow-up answers.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: You would think, Speaker, from that response that everything is dealt with. But in fact, subways in Toronto are filled to crush capacity. Bus routes have been cut and service on remaining routes keeps getting less frequent and reliable. Meanwhile, fares are going up while services are getting to be worse. No wonder so many people think that their only option is the car.

The Premier has the ability to change this. She can restore the province’s traditional 50% funding for net transit operating costs and improve service not in 10 or 20 years but today. Why won’t she?

Hon. Steven Del Duca: As I mentioned in my initial answer to the first question that came from the NDP caucus on this, here are just some of the things that our government has invested in, specifically in the 416, in Toronto, as it relates to public transit. For example:

—$3.7 billion for GO regional express rail, here in Toronto alone, which will help to support and enable SmartTrack;

—$5.3 billion to build the Eglinton Crosstown LRT, the single largest public transit project in Ontario history;

—almost $2 billion to continue to expand rapid transit in wonderful Scarborough;

—$974 million from the Move Ontario Trust for the Toronto-York Spadina subway extension, which opened in Vaughan last December;

—$456 million to build out the Union Pearson Express; and

—specifically to the gas tax funding I alluded to earlier, $2.1 billion since 2004 for the city of Toronto alone to help support transit operations.

I look forward to talking about more of the good news we’ve delivered to the people of Toronto for transit in the final answer.

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

Mr. Peter Tabuns: Again to the Acting Premier: That answer is why people are so cynical about public transit. The Premier will run publicly funded ads boasting about how much she cares about transit riders, but on the buses, on the subways and on the streetcars, transit riders know the truth: Service has gotten worse while fares have become more expensive.

The Premier can change this. She can restore public confidence in transit. She can improve transit service today. She can restore provincial funding for transit operations, as the NDP has committed. Why won’t she?

Hon. Steven Del Duca: I mentioned a second ago that there’s more. For example, here in the city of Toronto, our government is investing $416 million to support the purchase of brand new streetcars. Starting in early 2019, all GO Transit trips within Toronto specifically will only cost Presto card users $3 per trip, which means, for the very people the member from Toronto–Danforth pretends to represent and speak for, we are making their transit more affordable. That’s what our government is doing.

And just this morning—maybe the member didn’t know this—the Premier and the Minister of Transportation joined with Mayor Tory and others to sign an MOU to commit provincial funding to the downtown relief line, to the Yonge north subway extension, to more transit in Scarborough, and to the waterfront LRT. That’s what our government is doing while you’re busy talking—

Interjections.

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

Interjection.

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

New question.

Long-term care

Ms. Teresa J. Armstrong: My question is to the Acting Premier. The NDP hears frequently from Ontario families who are concerned about long-term care. Even front-line health care workers have also been sounding alarm bells. They work hard every day to take care of residents, but when you’re short-staffed, you just can’t do it all.

We learned today that the families of two patients have filed class-action claims against two private, for-profit long-term-care providers. The claims are horrendous: bedsores so deep that bone was exposed; maggots crawling inside untreated skin wounds.

How is it possible that such things are happening to our seniors in Ontario?

Hon. Yasir Naqvi: To the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care.

Hon. Helena Jaczek: I want to assure the families and individuals living in long-term-care facilities that I, as the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care, and our government take the responsibility to ensure our residents in each and every long-term-care home are safe and that they’re living securely, with dignity, and getting the type of care that they deserve.

Clearly, I cannot comment on the issues of various legal matters. Their case is before the courts. But our government, I think, has demonstrated our commitment to ensuring the safety and well-being through a very rigorous inspection system and regulatory framework, which we are continuously working to improve. Currently, as I’m sure every member knows, we have a very strong inspection system.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Ms. Teresa J. Armstrong: “‘This is not a one-off scenario. These problems are pervasive,’ said the lawyer leading both lawsuits.

“‘We are alleging that there is a systemic negligence going on, that there is a failure to deliver the kind of care that’s been promised,’ she said.”

“Systemic negligence”: Just imagine how it must feel for an Ontario family to entrust their elderly mothers, fathers or grandparents to a long-term-care system with such pervasive problems.

Why have the Premier and this Liberal government stubbornly refused to conduct a full commission of inquiry into long-term care, as the NDP has repeatedly proposed?

Hon. Helena Jaczek: We have increased our oversight through the Strengthening Quality and Accountability for Patients Act, which was passed last December, to ensure all operators are addressing concerns promptly. This includes new enforcement tools and surprise inspections. There are financial penalties that we’ve introduced and even provincial offences for operators who repeatedly do not comply with the requirements of the act.

We’ve also introduced a website. It’s very easily accessible—I’ve consulted it myself—where you can look up, on each and every long-term-care home in Ontario, their performance and the results of inspections. So families and individuals can assure themselves of the safety that they will receive from a particular home.

I will have more to say in the supplementary.

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

Ms. Teresa J. Armstrong: We also learned today that an 88-year-old Hamilton mother was badly injured at her long-term-care home, and there is speculation it may have been as a result of an assault. Her daughter found her with a black eye and, later, a goose egg on her forehead and bruises down her body. The daughter said, “If a child had those injuries, something would be done immediately. But because people in those nursing homes are old, no one fights for their protection.”

When will this government protect seniors and conduct a full commission of inquiry into long-term care so we can find and fix the problems in long-term care and look after our seniors?

Hon. Helena Jaczek: We have every confidence that we have an inspection system that is working well, that is working to improve our system and working with operators across the province. But we know that there is more to do because, as our population is aging and living with even more complex conditions, the needs are increasingly complex. This is why, in our 2018 budget, we’re investing $300 million over three years to increase staffing in long-term-care homes. This means that every long-term-care home, all 628 in this province, will benefit from an additional registered nurse.

It will ensure that every home in the province has staff with specialized training in behavioural supports for residents with cognitive impairments. It means an additional 15 million hours of nursing, personal support and therapeutic care for our loved ones living in long-term care.

We will continue with our program, ensuring our seniors are living in safety and security in long-term-care homes in this province.

Energy policies

Mr. John Yakabuski: My question is to the Acting Premier. The Liberals’ disastrous energy policy has forced many Ontarians to make a choice between heating and eating. Skyrocketing energy bills have put them in a most precarious position. The Liberals’ answer was to ban winter disconnections, which amounts to no more than a stay of execution. Well, winter is over, Speaker, and we find that thousands are now facing disconnection this spring.

If hundreds of struggling families in Sudbury and thousands across Ontario couldn’t afford to pay their hydro bill in the winter, what makes the government think they will be able to pay the bill, plus the arrears, in the spring? What is the Acting Premier saying to those families now that the wolf is at the door?

Hon. Yasir Naqvi: Speaker, last winter, as you know, our government passed legislation that granted the province’s independent energy regulator the power to end all winter disconnections and protect Ontarians, because no one should ever be put at risk of disconnection in the winter. Our priority is to make sure families and businesses have access to clean, reliable and affordable electricity.

While the ban on winter disconnections ended on April 30, there are a number of government programs designed to help reduce the cost of electricity bills for vulnerable consumers. We encourage all customers to contact their local utility about qualifying for programs that are in place to help. For example, our government expanded electricity support programs, such as the Ontario Electricity Support Program and the Rural and Remote Rate Protection Program, which provide support to lower-income customers and those customers with the highest delivery rates.

These customers are seeing savings of up to 40% to 50% off their electricity bills. Speaker, these are important programs that are available in addition to the 25% off in our fair hydro plan.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary.

Mr. John Yakabuski: Speaker, it is the disastrous energy policies of this government that led to the skyrocketing hydro prices and the skyrocketing number of people who were subject to winter disconnections in the first place. They had to act because of their mistakes in the energy policy, signing exorbitant contracts under the Green Energy Act with Liberal friends that the Auditor General herself said were far in excess of the market value for electricity. Why would the Liberals now suggest that someone who cannot pay their bill in January can pay it in May, including arrears?

Won’t the Acting Premier simply admit that their energy policies have been a disaster in this province and that their government is not fit for re-election?

Hon. Yasir Naqvi: Speaker, we have worked extremely hard to develop an electricity system that is clean, accessible and reliable. Ontarians should be very proud that in our province we do not burn dirty coal to produce electricity the way Conservatives used to—and they actually ran again and again to continue to burn dirty coal that is bad for our health and bad for our environment.

We have taken steps to ensure that our electricity system is clean, but we have not stopped there. We have also ensured that there is a 25% reduction in all electricity bills across the province. What was the response of the Conservatives? They voted against that program.

When we introduced programs like the Ontario Electricity Support Program—

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

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you. I let that one go.

New question.

Autism treatment

M me France Gélinas: My question will be for the Minister of Children and Youth Services. Minister, my office has been approached by many parents, including Mrs. Julia Ritchie and her little girl June. June was diagnosed with severe autism in October 2017, when she was 30 months old. She has been on the wait-list for treatment since that date.

The family was originally told that it would take about six months. Well, the six months have come and gone, and they are now facing a 2.5-to-three-year-long wait-list.

Can the minister explain where children with autism in Sudbury and Nickel Belt can find the faster, more effective autism services this government promised over two years ago?

Hon. Michael Coteau: I would like to thank the member for the question. The member knows that this government has invested more money into autism services than any government in this country. In fact, I would say that we’ve invested more resources than any government in North America.

We know that our contribution to autism is actually creating more space; 16,000 more spaces will be created in Ontario over the next few years. We are seeing change. I went to the opening of Erinoaks and I spoke to parents specifically about the changes that are taking place. I met a young family there with a young girl who was non-verbal who got into a program a year ago, and because of the program, now she is speaking. We’re seeing the changes on the ground.

Mr. Speaker, it’s the NDP that has said that they would rip up the entire program if they were put into a position of power.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

M me France Gélinas: We don’t see on the ground any evidence of those investments in Nickel Belt or Sudbury. The kids are still waiting a very long time.

Mrs. Ritchie could not wait the 18 months for an assessment, so the family paid privately in the hope that June would be seen faster. Child and Community Resources in Sudbury is presently admitting children into treatment who were put on the wait-list in October 2015. This is more than two and a half years ago. This is a lifetime for the 800 children on the wait-list in Sudbury.

Can the minister explain what action he will take so that little June and the 800 other kids on the wait-list get the treatment they need in a timely fashion?

Hon. Michael Coteau: If the member opposite wants to see evidence, she just needs to go and talk to the people of Ontario. We’ve gone right across the province. We’ve held town halls. We’ve spoken to people.

It’s the NDP that says they’ll do two things: Number one, they’ll rip the program apart and start new, which is a shame because parents like where we’re at today. The other thing the NDP has committed to doing is not supporting direct funding.

We have made a significant change. For the first time in the history of Ontario, direct funding will be applied to parents so they can have the choice. It’s about building confidence and choice in the system.

Not to mention the Conservatives; we know where their leader stands, because he doesn’t believe that kids should be living on streets with them.

Greenbelt

Mrs. Cristina Martins: My question is for the Minister of the Environment and Climate Change. Back in 2003, our urban communities were sprawling at a dangerous rate. Every year, tens of thousands of acres of farmland, wild land and wetlands, including ravines and rivers, were being encroached on by new development.

Ontarians were rightfully concerned for economic and environmental reasons. The great majority of people, including residents from my riding of Davenport, agree that to keep our communities livable, we cannot pave over every square inch of farmland and wetlands in Ontario. That’s why we promised them that we would take action, and we did.

Speaker, can the minister please explain to the House how we are taking further action to protect the greenbelt?

Hon. Chris Ballard: Thank you to the member from Davenport for that very important question. As the Premier said yesterday, we’re committed to expanding the greenbelt to protect even more of our natural environment from development. We’re expanding and protecting the greenbelt so our kids and grandkids never have to worry about being able to enjoy or access nature.

Meanwhile, Doug Ford made a private deal to develop the greenbelt to help rich developers get even richer. Doug Ford has confessed on tape to having already talked to some of the biggest developers in the country and offered to give them greenbelt land.

Now Doug Ford and the PCs are backing away from that decision, but you know they can’t be trusted to protect our greenbelt lands, Mr. Speaker. We can’t take a chance. Once the greenbelt is gone, the greenbelt is gone.

Our government created the greenbelt to ensure that Ontario has protected green land and clean drinking water for generations to come. We’re committed to protecting it.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary.

Mrs. Cristina Martins: I want to thank the minister for that answer. Speaker, our government created the largest permanent greenbelt anywhere in the world. It protects nearly two million acres of valuable land and water.

Last year, we expanded the greenbelt. We protected an additional 10,000 hectares. That’s the equivalent of almost 20,000 new football fields that has been protected. Residents from across Davenport sent me emails to thank our Premier and thank our government for this.

Our new expansion includes 21 new urban river valleys and wetlands that connect to Lake Ontario. We’ve also extended greenbelt-like protections for natural heritage, water and agriculture to the entire greater Golden Horseshoe area. This further ensures that sensitive lands are protected for generations to come, without constraining development. Meanwhile, Doug Ford and the PCs have flip-flopped on the issue, proving they’re willing to say anything to get elected.

Speaker, can the minister please explain to the House how we’re continuing to protect the greenbelt for the people of Ontario?

Hon. Chris Ballard: Thank you again to the member from Davenport for another very important question. Speaker, it’s clearer than ever that Doug Ford cannot be trusted to protect the greenbelt or the environment. If his secret deal with developers hadn’t been exposed, does anyone believe he would have backed off?

It makes you wonder what other promises have been made in private, to whom and in exchange for what. Paving the greenbelt? Selling cannabis in corner stores? Ending rent control? These are the promises that Doug Ford makes when he thinks voters aren’t around to hear him. That’s the real Doug Ford, Speaker. He’s not backing down; he’s backing off. But if he gets elected, watch out. We know who Doug Ford is, and we know who he will stand up for, and it is not the little guy.

Interjections.

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

Mr. John Yakabuski: What a speech. You just won the election. My goodness. Wow. Everybody believes you.

Sorry, Speaker.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): I’m sure you are.

New question.

Cancer treatment

Ms. Laurie Scott: My question is to the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care. One out of every eight Canadian women is being diagnosed with breast cancer, and 30% of all breast cancers become metastatic. Luckily, there are treatments available that help to keep the disease under control and help these women live better, longer lives.

Unfortunately, negotiations to get these medications covered by our health care system can go on for over a year without any updates. Patients in desperate need of these drugs are being left in the dark, waiting. But cancer does not wait, Mr. Speaker.

Last year, the ministry said that an announcement to make the process more accountable to patients would be forthcoming. When can we finally expect the announcement from this minister?

Hon. Helena Jaczek: Certainly, we know that there is great progress made in the treatment of breast cancer, and our government has obviously been very active in this particular area, with the Ontario Breast Screening Program and new and enhanced treatments for patients.

In terms of cancer drugs in general, I would remind the member opposite that we have an evidence-based system here in Ontario. We believe that, clearly, we need medical expertise in terms of effectiveness and side effects; and, of course, we’re part of a national program as well to analyze new and emerging treatments and drugs.

We take this responsibility very seriously. We have taken the politics out of these decisions, and we will continue to do so. We believe in ensuring that we do a thorough analysis and we make our choices based on evidence.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Ms. Laurie Scott: Back to the minister: In similar jurisdictions, we see more transparency and more timely benchmarks in the negotiation process, which helps government prepare recommendations to pharmaceutical companies. For example, if the price of a drug is too high or it doesn’t meet certain conditions, the negotiators know what needs to change, and they get back to the table quickly.

Last October, I tabled a petition launched by Rethink Breast Cancer that has since received over 10,000 signatures, calling on Ontario to take the lead in fixing this process.

Once again, my question to the minister on behalf of the signatories, the breast cancer patients and their families is: What have you done to make the negotiation process accountable and when are you going to put proper deadlines in place so that Ontario cancer patients get the treatments that they need?

Hon. Helena Jaczek: As I have said several times in this House, we will continue to analyze data. We will encourage all the experts who are involved in the processes, whether at the national level or here in Ontario, to do their work in an expeditious fashion. When it comes to negotiations, obviously we will be part of the national system in terms of bulk purchasing, which will have the potential to drive costs down.

We’re on top of the situation, Mr. Speaker. We are working very, very hard in this regard. I think, overall, the member opposite and I share the need to move as fast as we can and in the best interests of Ontarians. We are working all the time in the public interest.

Water quality

Mr. Peter Tabuns: My question is to the Minister of the Environment and Climate Change. Dufferin Aggregates is applying to expand a permit to take water in the Waverly Uplands. This is a critical groundwater recharge area for the Alliston aquifer. The application is for a huge expansion of the area and depth of excavation. Local residents, including the local First Nations, are opposed to this in the vicinity of what would have been the area of site 41, an exceptional source of groundwater that was the site of an extensive and ultimately successful fight to protect some of the cleanest groundwater anywhere in Canada.

What steps will you take, Minister, to protect this exceptionally clean groundwater?

Hon. Chris Ballard: Thank you to the member opposite for what is a very important question. You know, when it comes to protecting the environment and protecting our groundwater sources, we do take that exceptionally seriously. Our primary job is to protect the environment and protect human health.

I know that any time an application comes before my ministry to expand or change the terms of use, whether it be landfill or aggregates or virtually anything else, there is a very rigorous process that our ministry puts the applicant through. We first set very rigorous terms of reference, and then we ensure, when the applicant comes back, that they have met the terms of reference in terms of the information that they have provided us.

Speaker, when it comes to this particular project, you can be assured that our ministry is carefully reviewing all of the information that it has been provided, and we will make sure that the health of the environment and the health of humans are protected.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Peter Tabuns: Again to the Minister of the Environment and Climate Change: The fight to protect groundwater seems to be never-ending in Ontario. No sooner are we done with one fight—as we were with the mega quarry at Melancthon—than we’re confronted with another. Ontario needs a comprehensive groundwater strategy that will protect our groundwater now and for a long time to come.

Will the minister put this application on hold until the people of this province have a chance to comprehensively address the whole question of protecting our precious groundwater?

Hon. Chris Ballard: It’s a good follow-up to the question. It touches on a couple of things. We know that there is real public concern about the taking of groundwater for bottling purposes, for example. With that in mind, our government put in a moratorium. We’ve put a pause on new permits, on expanding the amount of water being taken from groundwater sources. We also increased the fee to those companies that were taking groundwater for bottling purposes. With that funding, we’ve been engaged in doing some real science so that we can make science-based decisions moving forward when it comes to groundwater sources.

I want to touch on groundwater sources. Where I come from, in my riding, we sit right on top of the Oak Ridges moraine, Speaker, which is part of the greenbelt. You may have heard me speak about that in the House just a few minutes ago. The Oak Ridges moraine is the rain barrel of multiple water sources feeding southern Ontario. So I’ve grown up very concerned about this.

Clean technology

Mr. Arthur Potts: My question is to the Minister of Research, Innovation and Science. We all know that climate change is a real threat and a problem that must be tackled now. That is why our government has made fighting climate change a priority, with our cap-and-trade program that puts a price on carbon. Through the nearly $2 billion we raise annually, we’ve helped build the fastest-growing clean-tech sector in Canada, if not North America, with $18.8 billion in revenue, 5,000 companies and 130,000 employees.

In fact, since 2003, our government has committed over $740 million to more than 1,600 research and commercialization projects. I understand that clean tech in Ontario is a diverse sector that includes energy infrastructure, non-carbon generation and storage.

Will the minister inform the members of this House how these investments have contributed to creating an innovative clean-tech sector?

Hon. Reza Moridi: I want to thank the member for Beaches–East York for his advocacy on science and technology.

Mr. Speaker, on May 2, I was pleased to speak about the successful recipients of Ontario’s Low Carbon Innovation Fund. Through the Technology Demonstration stream, we are supporting 10 projects, one of which uses artificial intelligence to manage energy storage systems in high-rise buildings. We are also supporting 12 projects through the Technology Validation stream, including a project to increase wind turbine efficiency and a project that will help absorb atmospheric greenhouse gases.

I am very pleased to speak about our government’s investments and the work of our researchers, entrepreneurs and companies in their efforts to create a cleaner Ontario.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Arthur Potts: Thanks to the minister. As a doctoral fellow in physics, he is the right person to be leading these programs.

It is remarkable to see this government’s investments that are helping drive fantastic ideas into game-changing technologies that will improve the quality of life for every Ontarian. We know that the PC Party, as part of their five-point strategy, call this corporate welfare and that all of these programs will be cut. But we know that these investments are part of Ontario’s comprehensive Climate Change Action Plan, a plan that aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 15% below 1990 levels by the year 2020.

Right in front of our own eyes, we are watching Ontario’s clean-tech companies invent innovative ways to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and fight climate change. They are leaders in creating jobs and are focused on creating a whole clean-tech sector, part of our carbon-free future.

Speaker, through you to the minister: What is our government doing to ensure that these successful clean-tech companies have the ability to grow and meet global demand for innovative technologies?

Hon. Reza Moridi: Thank you again to the member for that very good question. On Tuesday, I was excited to announce that Ontario will invest $20 million in the innovation growth fund managed by Yaletown Partners and a $35-million investment commitment to Emerald Technology Ventures.

These investments are through the Ontario Capital Growth Corp., which is the venture capital agency of the government of Ontario. These funds will help tech firms get the capital they need to grow their businesses and create good jobs in the province of Ontario, and to make Ontario companies clean-tech leaders. They will create jobs and foster a safer environment for our people.

Fighting climate change and saving the greenbelt are not just priorities. It is our duty to protect our people and our land.

Special-needs children

Mr. Jeff Yurek: My question is to the Minister of Health and Long-Term Care. Special-needs services for medically complex children and their families are in a state of chaos. Ontario’s Special Needs Strategy calls for the shifting of these services from one ministry to another, which has created additional red tape, putting at risk hundreds of Ontario families that will not be able to access the care they need.

This will completely destabilize the way services are provided. In fact, this decision was so rushed, the government received 325 questions from providers about how this is going to unfold.

My question to the minister: Why did the government decide to do this without consulting with providers and parents or taking the time to necessarily think through the implications of this decision to move the services to another ministry?

Hon. Helena Jaczek: We’re certainly very proud of our special-needs strategy. It was initiated, obviously, by members of our government. There was a full and very detailed consultation in terms of looking at the needs of children with these complex medical conditions.

I know that in my own riding of Oak Ridges–Markham, we’re serviced by the Simcoe York children’s treatment centre. They do exceptional work. But there certainly is a feeling that some coordination with the Ministry of Health is necessary in a number of different ways.

In terms of the implementation of the strategy, this is a process that is ongoing. There have been considerable recent conversations with Home Care Ontario on this subject. I’ll have more to say in the supplementary.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Jeff Yurek: Mr. Speaker, back to the minister: Existing electronic communications and referral systems that are crucial to service delivery are being scrapped with the promise of recreating other systems from scratch. Therefore, the bureaucrats are going to revert to faxes, paper-based records and manual data entry in the interim. This will take away time from front-line service providers who have to deliver the service to special-needs children, and will impact the quality of care.

Speaker, will the minister postpone this process until the necessary planning and consultation have taken place?

Hon. Helena Jaczek: Minister of Children and Youth Services.

Hon. Michael Coteau: We as a government recognize that families caring for children and youth with special needs face unique challenges. As a government, we’re determined to make sure that we can provide the support they need so they can participate at home, at school and in the community. That’s why, in our 2018 budget, which I hope the opposition will be supporting, we announced over $250 million in funding to support children with special needs in our schools.

Mr. Speaker, we’re a government that believes we need to invest in young people because they’re our most valuable resource as a society. We need to make sure that they have the skills and the ability to go forward and live productive lives—unlike the Conservatives when they were in power, where they cut 22% for anyone with any form of disability. It’s shameful, and they need—

Interjection.

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

I ask the member from Whitby–Oshawa to come to order. Thank you.

New question.

Soins à domicile / Home care

M. Gilles Bisson: Ma question est pour la ministre de la Santé. Une grande madame qu’on connaît très bien à la ville de Hearst, M me Claire Chabot, a fallu avoir une deuxième chirurgie au genou au mois de mars, et parce qu’elle avait été à travers une expérience assez honteuse quant aux services à domicile qui ont été donnés quand elle est retournée à la maison, elle a décidé, pour sa deuxième opération, de s’assurer que le RLISS met en place les services nécessaires pour qu’elle puisse retourner à la maison et s’assurer qu’elle serait sécure avec les services nécessaires.

Ce qui est vraiment un problème ici, ce n’est pas seulement qu’elle n’a pas eu ces services dont elle avait besoin—elle a eu les services minimes—mais qu’elle s’est fait dire par le RLISS, et ça c’est une « quote » directement du RLISS, « Non, il faut couper, et j’ai toute une pile de dossiers à réviser, car il y en a trop qui reçoivent des services présentement. »

C’est acceptable?

Hon. Helena Jaczek: Certainly, our home care services are some that we’re very proud of. We intend to make them as seamless as possible in transition, post-surgery, to the home. This has been a subject of a great deal of study by individual LHINs to ensure that the service is available on discharge and that it is appropriate for the needs of the actual patient. This is why, in our 2018 budget, we’re investing some $650 million in home care over the next three years—$230 million in this year alone. A lot of this funding is going to go for more personal support, so we’re funding some additional 1,400 full-time positions. There will be more nursing visits and more therapy visits.

Overall, we know there’s more work to do, and we are doing it.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary.

M. Gilles Bisson: Madame la Ministre, ça fait 15 ans que vous êtes là et on est rendu au point où, quand quelqu’un téléphone au RLISS, il se fait dire, « Il y a du monde qui a trop de services et j’ai besoin de réduire. » Ça, ce n’est pas augmenter le système et ce n’est pas renforcer le système; c’est faire moins avec moins.

So, donc, la question que je vous demande : est-ce acceptable qu’une madame comme M me Chabot, quand elle retourne à la maison, n’a pas les services nécessaires pour être capable de s’assurer qu’elle est sécure à sa maison, à place de la garder dans un hôpital?

Hon. Helena Jaczek: Since we’ve been in power, in the last 15 years, we have more than doubled funding for home care, so of course we take this particular area very, very seriously. We know that people are living longer—which is a good thing—sometimes with more complex conditions. We are dedicated to ensuring that people have the appropriate care in their homes. We are taking a multi-faceted approach and, I would say, a very comprehensive approach.

We know there’s a need for more personal support workers across this province, so we’re working with our colleges in terms of the training and making it an entry-level position that will expand further in the future in their career path. We’re increasing the training for PSWs. We’re making more of them available. We will continue to work in this regard, and we will work with our LHINs to ensure that the appropriate supports are there.

Transportation planning

Mr. Shafiq Qaadri: Ma question est pour la ministre des Transports. Our government has made it a priority to invest in a wide range of transit and transportation options. Of course, I know that first-hand because the newest rapid transit project, for example, is the billion-dollar, custom-designed Finch West LRT in my own community of Etobicoke North, with eight stops. This will increase GO service across the network. We’re expanding highways and, of course, providing more efficient transportation all around.

Time spent commuting, Speaker, as you’ll appreciate, means time taken away from family, friends and our day-to-day lives. That’s why, of course, we need to make the right investments to get people to their destinations faster and in a more efficient manner. It’s about getting shovels in the ground to deliver on those investments.

My question, Speaker, is this: Can the minister please provide an update on our progress to improve commute times across the region and specifically for people living in my community of Etobicoke North and beyond?

Hon. Kathryn McGarry: I want to thank the member from Etobicoke North for his ongoing commitment to tackling congestion, which is one of the greatest challenges we face in this region.

I was so pleased to be in Vaughan on an absolutely beautiful morning to announce that we now have shovels in the ground on our Highway 427 extension. I couldn’t imagine a better person to make this milestone announcement with than our former Minister of Transportation, the MPP for Vaughan, the Minister of Economic Development and Growth.

For this project, the highway will be extended by 6.6 kilometres, from Highway 7 to Major Mackenzie Drive, and widened to eight lanes from Finch Avenue to Highway 7. This is a $616-million investment that will help people and businesses in Etobicoke, York region and Peel region continue to move. It’s all part of our government’s plan to support people in their everyday lives by helping you spend less time in your car and more time with the people who matter most.

I look forward to giving more details in the supplementary.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary.

Mr. Shafiq Qaadri: Thank you, Speaker, and to the minister as well for her commitment.

I have to say, with the eight stops—as I said, custom-designed—from Humber College to Islington, some of my colleagues are wishing that kind of transportation infrastructure was in their own riding. I’m detecting a little bit of “stop” envy.

Speaker, I know commuters in York region and Peel and those coming from further south in Etobicoke—these sorts of investments make it easier for us to participate in events, see our families and free up time from commuting. While our government has made record investments in transit, some of course are still concerned about the impact that longer highways and commutes can have on our environment. At the same time, we have to rely on that highway network for our transportation needs. I, of course, agree that we need to make the right choices in the right places.

Speaker, can the minister please explain how the 427 extension in my own riding, and beyond, is part of a balanced plan to reduce congestion while also helping to shift people away from their commuting patterns by car?

Hon. Kathryn McGarry: I want to again thank the member from Etobicoke North. He’s absolutely correct: This is an important balance that we really need to strike. The health of our region is depending on it. In York region, for example, we’ve continued to build up transit options, including the opening of the new line 1 subway extension to Vaughan, and introducing all-day service during the week and new weekend service on the Barrie GO line.

But we also know that many commuters still rely on their cars for a variety of reasons, and that’s why projects like the $616-million Highway 427 extension are so important, but also why we need to be making the right choices when we’re planning these projects. To that end I’m pleased to say that high-occupancy toll lanes will also be installed on Highway 427, in both directions, for a total length of approximately 15.5 kilometres. These lanes are important. They encourage people to carpool, help manage congestion and provide more options to travellers.

Speaker, having shovels in the ground on this critical highway extension will support thousands of jobs on an annual basis and is an incredible step forward.

Child protection

Mrs. Gila Martow: I have a question is for the Minister of Children and Youth Services. In 2016, 22 privacy breaches were reported to the Ministry of Children and Youth Services with regard to child welfare cases. This past February, two CAS agencies were victims of ransomware attacks. In both cases, thousands of dollars were paid out to cyber criminals. The government was warned that cyber security must be a priority for children’s aid societies and that funding had to be allocated to protect sensitive information. Mr.

Speaker, this minister mandated CAS agencies to upload their data to CPIN, which puts them at risk of security breaches. Will the minister tell us what police agencies were brought in to investigate the hacking of Ontario residents’ sensitive information?

Hon. Michael Coteau: Thank you to the member opposite for the question. Mr. Speaker, we brought forward the most comprehensive piece of legislation for child protection in the history of this province.

Ms. Sylvia Jones: You allowed people’s personal and private information—

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): This time the member from Dufferin-Caledon will come to order.

Carry on.

Hon. Michael Coteau: Mr. Speaker, this piece of legislation did a lot to change the way in which child protection is delivered in the province, including the way in which we collect and the way in which we hold these organizations accountable. The party opposite decided to vote against Bill 89, which included very comprehensive pieces of information.

In the supplemental, I’d like to talk a bit about Bill 89 and why the Conservatives voted against it.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary.

Mrs. Gila Martow: Again to the minister: The ministry is on record promising that CPIN has an IT audit log on file for each case to monitor who is accessing the file. Jane Kovarikova, president of the Child Welfare PAC, recently asked a ministry welfare agency for the log-in data of who was accessing her file. The response from a CPIN manager at the ministry was that searches on records are actually not tracked.

Since data breaches are obviously occurring and this minister has failed to monitor the whole mess, will the minister tell us if families have been notified that he may have allowed their private information to be exposed? I’d appreciate an answer.

Hon. Michael Coteau: Mr. Speaker, Bill 89 was proclaimed this week without the support, obviously, of the Conservatives. The NDP did support the bill. In that bill, it raised the age of protection, strengthens the rights of young people, commits to addressing systemic racism, commits to culturally appropriate services for First Nations, and it looks at ways to hold CASs accountable. The party opposite voted against it. Why? Because one of their candidates, Tanya Granic Allen, walked into their caucus and told them that the life coalition would not support it because of the gender identity piece.

That party should be ashamed of their position when it comes to protecting our children here in the province of Ontario.

Interjections.

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

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Order. It would be a shame that we ended the way in which it’s headed. Thank you.

New question.

Child care

Ms. Catherine Fife: My question is to the Acting Premier.

Kitchener has the second-highest child care costs in Ontario; the first being, of course, Toronto. Finding quality, affordable child care is a game-changer for women.

The CCPA survey which studied gender inequality in the country and in this province found that nearly half of all involuntary female part-time workers are in a part-time job because they can only find part-time child care.

Finding affordable, quality child care in Toronto, Kitchener, Hamilton and Mississauga is like winning the lottery—if you can find a space. For women to try to re-enter the workforce or return to school and better their lives and better their community—there are no options, even with this government. If you find a space and you qualify for a subsidy, the two do not match up in this province.

What I say to this government is: After 15 years of failing families, of failing children, of failing women, why should anybody believe you when you talk about child care in this budget or in any other budget?

Hon. Yasir Naqvi: To the minister responsible for early years and child care.

Hon. Indira Naidoo-Harris: I’m really pleased to rise and answer this question. There’s so much we’re doing, and I really don’t know where to start.

First of all, let’s just talk about what we are doing right now when it comes to ensuring that we are building a solid foundation. Absolutely, when it comes to child care, we are investing $2.2 billion over three years that will provide free child care for preschoolers, which will save families an average of $17,000 a year. That’s in addition to what we’re doing already when it comes to full-day kindergarten.

Let me just talk a little bit about the NDP platform, Mr. Speaker. Their—

Ms. Catherine Fife: Free kindergarten is not child care.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Finish, please.

Hon. Indira Naidoo-Harris: Mr. Speaker, their platform does not make sense. It’s not fully costed out. It doesn’t build a workforce. It doesn’t increase spaces. Really, it just makes a lot of promises.

Here’s what we’re doing: We’re already on track to create 100,000 more spaces, because we know we’ll need those spaces to be able to deliver free preschool child care. We’re also building a workforce. And we are doing everything we can to create a new wage grid—

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

Visitors

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The Minister of Labour on a point of order.

Hon. Kevin Daniel Flynn: Speaker, on a point of order: I wasn’t here at the start, so I didn’t get to introduce a great individual who has joined us here today. Bob Farkas is from Oakville. He has finished 90 races, raising money for charities at each one of them. He even rappelled down a 12-storey building to raise money for Easter Seals in Kitchener.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Welcome.

The Minister of Transportation on a point of order.

Hon. Kathryn McGarry: I want to welcome the family of page Madeline Buss. Her aunt and uncle, Lisa Maavara and Gary Maavara, are visiting today from the great riding of Don Valley West. Please welcome them to Queen’s Park.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Welcome.

The member from Kingston and the Islands on a point of order.

Ms. Sophie Kiwala: I would like to extend another warm welcome in question period today: to Danella Olsen, who is a lead developer with the IT department. Welcome to question period.

Deferred Votes

Government Contract Wages Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur les salaires pour les marchés publics

Deferred vote on the motion for second reading of the following bill:

Bill 53,

An Act respecting the establishment of minimum government contract wages / Projet de loi 53, Loi concernant la fixation de salaires minimums pour les marchés publics.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Call in the members. This will be a five-minute bell.

The division bells rang from 1140 to 1145.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): On April 24, 2018, Mr. Flynn moved second reading of Bill 53,

An Act respecting the establishment of minimum government contract wages.

All those in favour, please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.

Ayes

Albanese, Laura

Anderson, Granville

Arnott, Ted

Baker, Yvan

Ballard, Chris

Berardinetti, Lorenzo

Bisson, Gilles

Bradley, James J.

Chan, Michael

Cho, Raymond Sung Joon

Coe, Lorne

Colle, Mike

Coteau, Michael

Crack, Grant

Damerla, Dipika

Del Duca, Steven

Delaney, Bob

Des Rosiers, Nathalie

Dhillon, Vic

Dickson, Joe

Dong, Han

Duguid, Brad

Fife, Catherine

Flynn, Kevin Daniel

Forster, Cindy

Fraser, John

Gélinas, France

Gravelle, Michael

Hardeman, Ernie

Hatfield, Percy

Hoggarth, Ann

Hunter, Mitzie

Jaczek, Helena

Jones, Sylvia

Kiwala, Sophie

Lalonde, Marie-France

Leal, Jeff

MacCharles, Tracy

Malhi, Harinder

Mangat, Amrit

Mantha, Michael

Martins, Cristina

Martow, Gila

McGarry, Kathryn

McMahon, Eleanor

Milczyn, Peter Z.

Moridi, Reza

Naidoo-Harris, Indira

Naqvi, Yasir

Natyshak, Taras

Nicholls, Rick

Potts, Arthur

Qaadri, Shafiq

Rinaldi, Lou

Sandals, Liz

Sattler, Peggy

Scott, Laurie

Sousa, Charles

Tabuns, Peter

Taylor, Monique

Vanthof, John

Vernile, Daiene

Walker, Bill

Wilson, Jim

Wong, Soo

Yakabuski, John

Yurek, Jeff

Zimmer, David

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): All those opposed, please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.

The Clerk of the Assembly (Mr. Todd Decker): The ayes are 68; the nays are 0.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): I declare the motion carried.

Second reading agreed to.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Pursuant to the order of the House dated May 2, 2018, the bill is ordered for third reading.

Correctional Services Transformation Act, 2018 / Loi de 2018 sur la transformation des services correctionnels

Deferred vote on the motion for third reading of the following bill:

Bill 6,

An Act to enact the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services Act, 2018 and the Correctional Services and Reintegration Act, 2018, to make related amendments to other Acts, to repeal

an Act and to revoke a regulation / Projet de loi 6, Loi édictant la Loi de 2018 sur le ministère de la Sécurité communautaire et des Services correctionnels et la Loi de 2018 sur les services correctionnels et la réinsertion sociale, apportant des modifications connexes à d’autres lois et abrogeant une loi et un règlement.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Call in the members. This will be a five-minute bell.

The division bells rang from 1148 to 1149.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): On April 13, 2018, Ms. Albanese moved third reading of Bill 6,

An Act to enact the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services Act, 2018 and the Correctional Services and Reintegration Act, 2018, to make related amendments to other Acts, to repeal

an Act and to revoke a regulation.

All those in favour, please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.

Ayes

Albanese, Laura

Anderson, Granville

Baker, Yvan

Ballard, Chris

Berardinetti, Lorenzo

Bisson, Gilles

Bradley, James J.

Chan, Michael

Colle, Mike

Coteau, Michael

Crack, Grant

Damerla, Dipika

Del Duca, Steven

Delaney, Bob

Des Rosiers, Nathalie

Dhillon, Vic

Dickson, Joe

Dong, Han

Duguid, Brad

Fife, Catherine

Flynn, Kevin Daniel

Forster, Cindy

Fraser, John

Gélinas, France

Gravelle, Michael

Hatfield, Percy

Hoggarth, Ann

Hunter, Mitzie

Jaczek, Helena

Kiwala, Sophie

Lalonde, Marie-France

Leal, Jeff

MacCharles, Tracy

Malhi, Harinder

Mangat, Amrit

Mantha, Michael

Martins, Cristina

McGarry, Kathryn

McMahon, Eleanor

Milczyn, Peter Z.

Moridi, Reza

Naidoo-Harris, Indira

Naqvi, Yasir

Natyshak, Taras

Potts, Arthur

Qaadri, Shafiq

Rinaldi, Lou

Sandals, Liz

Sattler, Peggy

Sousa, Charles

Tabuns, Peter

Taylor, Monique

Vanthof, John

Vernile, Daiene

Wong, Soo

Zimmer, David

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): All those opposed, please rise one at a time and be recognized by the Clerk.

Nays

Arnott, Ted

Cho, Raymond Sung Joon

Coe, Lorne

Hardeman, Ernie

Jones, Sylvia

Martow, Gila

Nicholls, Rick

Oosterhoff, Sam

Scott, Laurie

Walker, Bill

Wilson, Jim

Yakabuski, John

Yurek, Jeff

The Clerk of the Assembly (Mr. Todd Decker): The ayes are 56; the nays are 13.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): I declare the motion carried.

Be it resolved that the bill do now pass and be entitled as in the motion.

Third reading agreed to.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): There are no further deferred votes. This House stands recessed until 1 p.m. this afternoon.

The House recessed from 1151 to 1300.

Introduction of Visitors

Mrs. Liz Sandals: We will have coming in, as they dribble up from the dining room, my family: my husband, David; my son, Richard; and my grandson, Malcolm, and a number of former staff who have worked for me in various ministries: Aisling MacKnight, Alexi White, Charlini Nicholapillai, Colleen Hogan, Jason Pichelli, Kate Hammer, Kerry Smuk, Lauren Tedesco, Lawvin Hadisi, Meaghan Salmons, Mike Dillon, Mora Carruthers, Sam Andrey, Alyssa Brierley, Jack Rubin, and, from the Ontario Public School Boards’ Association, the executive director, Rusty Hick.

Members’ Statements

Hospice care

Mr. Jim Wilson: I rise today to talk again about the discrepancy between how hospices are funded in Ontario. This is an issue I’ve been raising with this government for close to a decade, and yet it’s still an issue today.

I wanted to begin by congratulating the staff and many volunteers of Matthews House Hospice in Alliston. I was pleased to participate in a funding announcement made by the member for Barrie last week where the hospice received $1.2 million to go toward the construction of their new 10-bed facility. This hospice is also to receive operational funding for all 10 of their beds, once open.

While this is good news for Alliston, Hospice Georgian Triangle in Collingwood, which receives no capital funding at all from the province for their 10-bed facility, only receives operational funding for six of their 10 beds. In fact, the four remaining beds are not allowed to be used and have sat idle for over a year.

Hospice Georgian Triangle has submitted several proposals to fund these beds. They have asked the government to use the beds in collaboration with Collingwood General and Marine Hospital to assist the hospital with capacity problems and flu outbreaks. They’ve asked to use the beds as respite beds, as they do in Sudbury. They’ve asked to use the beds if they fund them themselves; again, “no” from the government. All of these requests have been turned down.

I find it unconscionable that four in-demand beds are sitting idle at the direction of the government. I ask the Premier and the minister to show some flexibility, fund these beds and allow them to be put to good use.

Legislative staff

Ms. Catherine Fife: I’ve been thinking a lot about this place, the Ontario Legislature. There’s so much history here, and I still get that feeling of awe each time I walk up the front steps.

But it is the people who make a place special. In almost six years of serving the good people of Waterloo region, I have come to know, respect and, in some instances, befriend the staff here at Queen’s Park.

Thank you to the Clerks who have served this Legislature so well. My caucus has a special relationship with the amazing restaurant and kitchen staff here. The QP security contingent on any given day ranges from 30 to 45 security personnel. They have kept us safe and have, on several occasions, intervened on our behalf. Sometimes they also have to spend hours listening to us, which, let’s be honest, can’t be easy. It’s not easy being Bruno, or Jackie, the first female to serve as Sergeant-at-Arms.

Thank you to the cleaning staff who take such pride in the work they do in maintaining this majestic building; the media and the communications folks; the Hansard staff; the tour staff, who highlight and share the story of QP with the public; and Jenny, who delivers the mail each day. She always has a smile or a word of encouragement.

The gift shop people love me because they help me every Christmas with my last-minute shopping. They love me and I love them, and that’s as it should be.

I will miss my colleague and friend Cindy Forster most of all, who has been my Queen’s Park mom for six years. She has been instrumental—

Ms. Cindy Forster: Don’t make me cry. I have a member’s statement too.

Ms. Catherine Fife: —in talking me into running for this job, which I should dislike you for, but we’ve had many adventures over the last six years.

She’s one of the best people I know, and she’s an amazing public servant and politician. I thank her for the love and support over the years. I know that Brian is going to be so happy to have you back after 40 years of public service.

Please, let’s give a standing ovation to my friend Cindy.

Applause.

Sports in Beaches–East York

Mr. Arthur Potts: It’s a pleasure to rise today to discuss the incredible athleticism in my riding of Beaches–East York. A few weeks ago, the Ted Reeve midget AA Thunder shut out the London Junior Knights, winning the Ontario Hockey Federation championship. This year, our boys had an undefeated record in their division, going six games for six. This victory marks the first time the team has won a provincial title in their 54-year history.

But not only is hockey thriving. Five Beachers recently were part of a synchronized skating team that won gold at the 2018 Skate Canada Synchronized Skating Championships in Oshawa. The team scored a total of 111.32 points over two performances at the event. They beat out 12 other teams with a routine based on the Hollywood hit The Mask.

These teams would not be successful without the volunteers and the coaches whose time, energy and commitment to these sports have enabled them to succeed. As a hockey player, I understand the value of this guidance and the mentorship these coaches provide.

The value of sport to our community extends beyond the sport itself. It brings communities together. There’s nothing better than going to the rink to cheer a home team with a good group of friends—even better when the home team wins.

Again, I want to extend congratulations to the Ted Reeve midget AA Thunder and Skate Canada. We will continue to cheer you on.

Transportation planning

Mr. Ted Arnott: Once again I rise in this House to draw attention to the town of Halton Hills’ long-term transportation needs. We continue to call upon the Minister of Transportation to partner with the town to develop a long-term transportation strategy for the town.

Last fall, I worked with the mayor and staff of the town to initiate a private member’s resolution, which was unanimously passed by this House.

During debate, I spoke about the possible need for a Highway 7 Acton bypass; the issues surrounding the proposed commercial development of 340 Main Street, Acton; the Halton-Peel boundary area transportation study, which could lead to the construction of bypasses in Georgetown and Norval, a study which had been put on hold because of the GTA west corridor study; the promised all-day, two-way GO train service from Kitchener–Waterloo to Union Station with stops in Wellington–Halton Hills; the town’s role in the government’s decision to widen the 401 from Milton to Mississauga; and the need for traffic signals near the Sands condominium in Georgetown.

We asked the Minister of Transportation to be a funding partner and support the town’s vision of building and ensuring safe and efficient transportation opportunities for our residents and businesses.

I had numerous conversations with the former minister, the Honourable Steven Del Duca, and I believed we were making progress. Then a cabinet shuffle in January gave us a new Minister of Transportation. I know she is aware of these issues because I’ve talked to her too.

I’ve always been willing to reach across party lines to get things done. We have less than a week until the writ is dropped. The Minister of Transportation still has time to do the right thing, but time is running out.

The minister lives in the riding of Cambridge. I would expect she travels through Halton Hills every time she goes back and forth to Toronto. There is a town council meeting scheduled for this coming Monday night. While the agenda has been set, I know that town council and staff would welcome the Minister of Transportation to come to our civic centre and make this announcement. All she has to do is say yes.

One more time: I invite the minister to visit our riding and to announce her ministry’s support as a funding partner for the town of Halton Hills’ long-term transportation strategy. Let’s get going.

Injured workers

Ms. Cindy Forster: I’m going to use my last 90 seconds here to talk for people who still feel they have no voice, and those are the injured workers in this province.

I’m constantly amazed at the lengths that governments go to make announcements, only to find out they’re not what they seem.

On September 1, 2017, it was announced that compensation awards for pain and suffering are now exempt and will not affect what you receive on ODSP. Yet, after several months of trying to determine if a non-economic loss—or NEL—award is included, we find out that it is not.

Fifty-six-year-old Peter Hansen from my riding of Welland appealed four times to actually get his WSIB NEL award put in place. He finally won, only to have ODSP take away his $203.20 every month. A letter my office obtained from WSIB clearly states Mr. Hansen receives permanent disability benefits for life. But in the usual doublespeak, this is not considered compensation for pain and suffering. Why not talk to Peter and find out what pain and suffering is after several surgeries for an injured arm that included metal plates and screws?

A NEL award is defined as a permanent impairment as a result of a workplace injury or illness, but the government says that doesn’t include pain and suffering. What desk-bound pencil-pusher arrived at that decision? It makes no sense.

I ask this government, in its last days, to amend this ministry directive 5.1 and include NEL awards as exempt from ODSP deductions for Mr. Hansen and the hundreds of other injured workers trying to survive in this province. Thank you.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Further members’ statements? The member from Guelph.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: Thank you, Speaker. I—

Visitors

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Excuse me. As is the wont, there is a point of order. The member from Windsor–Tecumseh on a point of order.

Mr. Percy Hatfield: I seek unanimous consent to allow the member from Guelph to reintroduce her visitors in the gallery who weren’t quite here when she introduced them the first time.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: And now they took my crib sheet. Hansard has my crib sheet.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): I have to rule. The member is seeking unanimous consent to do reintroductions. Do we agree? Agreed. The member may do her introductions, and then the clock will start.

Mrs. Liz Sandals: Thank you very much. First of all, I would like to introduce my husband, David; my son, Richard; and my grandson, Malcolm—and, because he’s not quite like the others, the executive director of OPSBA, Rusty Hick.

Everybody else has at some point or another been on my staff here at Queen’s Park. I’m just trying to figure out who’s actually here: Aisling MacKnight; Charlini Nicholapillai—I always struggle getting this right—Colleen Hogan; Jason Pichelli; Kate Hammer; Kerry Smuk; Lauren Tedesco; Lawvin Hadisi—Lawvin is here; Meaghan Salmons is here now; Mora Carruthers is somewhere down at the other end, under the gallery there; Sam Andrey; Alyssa Brierley; Jack Rubin, who is at the other end; and Gabby Gallant, who just appeared.

I think I got everybody, didn’t I? Okay. A wonderful group of people.

Member for Guelph

Mrs. Liz Sandals: As you all know, when the election comes around, I won’t be running. I think somebody behind me here mentioned last week that I was having my 70th birthday, so I figured it was time to retire.

I want to start by thanking the voters of Guelph, who of course made all this possible for 30 years. And thank you to the two Premiers I have served under, Dalton McGuinty and Kathleen Wynne.

Dalton first appointed me as Monte Kwinter’s PA at Community Safety and Correctional Services, I suspect because Guelph had, as you know, Speaker, two jails that had recently closed before I became elected. Little did I realize it was going to take 15 years to even begin to figure out what to do with an historic retired jail.

The good news is that, I think just this week, Treasury Board dealt with some of the paperwork so that that land, or at least the vacant part of the land, can go over to the city of Guelph and they can create the Guelph Innovation District. Some projects, if you stick to them long enough, you actually get them done.

My next job was with Gerry Phillips, where I first got to join Treasury Board, which was sort of this wonderful master and the apprentice. Thank you to Gerry. I stayed on Treasury Board in various capacities for a very long time. But what I wanted to say was, what a wonderful opportunity that was: to begin at Queen’s Park with such pros as Monte and Gerry as role models, because both of them really taught me so much.

Dalton also appointed me—sorry, I have a cold just to complicate things. Dalton also appointed me to lead the Safe Schools Action Team, and that was later extended by Premier Wynne when she was the Minister of Education. Our work led to anti-bullying legislation, the first in Canada. We also recommended revising the sex ed curriculum based on consultations that began in 2008, making this the most-discussed curriculum revision ever, I think.

When Premier Wynne actually appointed me as Minister of Education, she asked me to finally get this curriculum implemented. It was actually—I was delighted to be able to take what we had started at the Safe Schools Action Team and finally get the curriculum in place. It’s interesting to note that the original purpose—and still the purpose—of those curriculum revisions was to help keep students safe, whether in their personal relationships or their Internet relationships.

At education, we created a new provincial collective bargaining scheme. People are up there in the gallery who have spent many sleepless nights in hotels dealing with that. We totally rewrote the child care act, which had not been updated since the early 1990s. Then, of course, I became president of Treasury Board, aka Dr. No. Many people up in the gallery have helped me say “no,” as well.

It’s a great end to that original apprenticeship that I served under Gerry Phillips, who incidentally, is still at Treasury Board as the world’s longest-serving unpaid intern, because Gerry actually is still an adviser to Treasury Board. He has outlasted even me at Treasury Board. The great news was we were able to balance the budget that we just came out with.

None of these achievements would be possible without the wonderful people in the gallery, and a special thank you to my family, who have put up with me for 30 years. It’s been a wonderful journey. Thank you, all.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): I’m sure I speak for all of us when I say to the member from Guelph, thank you for your service to Ontario.

Public transit

Mrs. Gila Martow: I just want to mention that last night I was at a wonderful public transit town hall in my riding of Thornhill at the Thornhill Community Centre. It was organized by the South Central York Region-Congestion Relief Committee. The organizers were Fred Winegust, Ricardo Mashregi and Jack Weinberg. We had representatives from lots of ratepayers’ associations, community groups and individuals. Mayor of Markham Frank Scarpitti was there with a lot of interesting perspectives, and Alan Shefman, a municipal local councillor in Thornhill for the city of Vaughan.

The provincial candidates for the upcoming election all got to give remarks and answer some questions as well about the Yonge subway.

I just want to mention that there’s still a two-fare wall if you go across Steeles. I want everybody here to be aware that residents of York region are stuck paying two fares. That needs to be discussed.

The Yonge subway—the government likes to make announcements and re-announcements every election, but they’ve had 15 years. Nothing has been done. We were told by experts yesterday that $6 billion is needed; coincidentally, Mr. Speaker, the Auditor General backed up by the Financial Accountable Officer said that there’s a $6-billion hole in this budget. It’s disappointing, to say the least, that we’re still hearing about preliminary design studies and not actually getting to work on buildin