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

April 6, 2017

41st Parliament, 2nd Session

< Previous sitting day

Next sitting day >

Hansard Transcripts

Votes and Proceedings

Orders and Notices

Hansard Transcripts 2017-Apr-06 (PDF)

L065 - Thu 6 Apr 2017 / Jeu 6 avr 2017

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ONTARIO

ASSEMBLÉE LÉGISLATIVE DE L’ONTARIO

Thursday 6 April 2017 Jeudi 6 avril 2017

Orders of the Day

Anti-Racism Act, 2017 / Loi de 2017 contre le racisme

Introduction of Visitors

Wearing of pins

Oral Questions

Youth employment

Sexual violence and harassment

Tenant protection

Tenant protection

Hydro rates

Executive compensation

Agri-food industry

Hydro charges

Lyme disease

Grandview Children’s Centre

Highway improvement

Air ambulance service

First responders

Affordable housing

Member for Oak Ridges–Markham

Introduction of Visitors

Members’ Statements

Hearth Place Cancer Support Centre

Service clubs

Mary Fraser

Battle of Vimy Ridge

Dementia

Abrigo Centre

Tartan Day

Canadian Corps

Fenwick school

Introduction of Bills

Courts of Justice Amendment Act (Judicial Sexual Assault Education), 2017 / Loi de 2017 modifiant la

Loi sur les tribunaux judiciaires (formation de la magistrature en matière d’agressions sexuelles)

Braiseryy Chicken Ltd. Act, 2017

Motions

Committee sittings

Petitions

School closures

Long-term care

Water fluoridation

Hydro rates

Employment standards

Dental care

Air quality

Hospital funding

Elevator maintenance

Primary health care

Private Members’ Public Business

Rea and Walter Act (Truss and Lightweight Construction Identification), 2017 / Loi Rea et Walter de 2017 sur l’identification des composants structuraux à ossature légère

Sikh massacre

Wind turbines

Rea and Walter Act (Truss and Lightweight Construction Identification), 2017 / Loi Rea et Walter de 2017 sur l’identification des composants structuraux à ossature légère

Sikh massacre

Wind turbines

Sikh massacre

Wind turbines

Visitors

Orders of the Day

Putting Consumers First Act (Consumer Protection Statute Law Amendment), 2017 / Loi de 2017 donnant la priorité aux consommateurs (modifiant des lois en ce qui concerne la protection du consommateur)

The House met at 0900.

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

Prayers.

Orders of the Day

Anti-Racism Act, 2017 / Loi de 2017 contre le racisme

Mr. Coteau moved second reading of the following bill:

Bill 114,

An Act to provide for Anti-Racism Measures / Projet de loi 114, Loi prévoyant des mesures contre le racisme.

Hon. Michael Coteau: Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to stand here today. I will be sharing my time with the member from Brampton–Springdale.

I am so pleased to move second reading of Bill 114,

An Act to provide for Anti-Racism Measures, which I’ll be referring to by its short name, the Anti-Racism Act, 2017.

I want to start by acknowledging that we’re gathered here today on the traditional territory of the Mississaugas of the New Credit and give thanks and recognition to the historical significance of the indigenous, Métis and Inuit people of this city, but also this region and this country.

I would also like to take a moment Mr. Speaker—Madam Speaker; there was a switch—just to recognize and acknowledge the guests here today. We have guests who have contributed so much to get to this point here today in regard to this bill.

Madam Speaker, I stand here today to talk to you about how we can make this province the best place to live and prosper and to be happy, not just for a privileged few, but for all Ontarians. We live in a multicultural province with a diverse and dynamic population. I believe it’s one of the things that makes this province so beautiful. We acknowledge and celebrate peoples’ individual differences, whether it’s gender identity, sexual identity, disability or race. We have a productive and vibrant society where people are making strides in industry, arts, science and technology.

As we celebrate our 150th anniversary, we can see that today’s Ontario is a land of diversity, innovation and opportunity. But as we reflect on that history and we look ahead to the next 150 years, we have to acknowledge entrenched barriers and inequities that prevent people from reaching their full potential. Despite all of the progress that we have made here in the province of Ontario, there are many indigenous, black and racialized people who continue to face barriers every day because of systemic racism and the consequences of colonialism, slavery and residential schools.

I have seen this first-hand, how systemic racism affects racialized people across the province of Ontario. It means that racialized university graduates have harder times getting jobs than non-racialized counterparts, despite having the exact same credentials; that racialized children are more likely to end up in the child welfare system in comparison to the rest of the population; and that they are less likely to have the support needed to go from high school into post-secondary education.

Madam Speaker, members and colleagues, these examples point to a need for us to understand and deal with systemic racism, which is often caused by hidden institutional biases and policies, practices and processes that privilege or disadvantage people based on race.

Systemic racism can be unintentional, and it can be a result of doing things the way things have always been done, without considering how they impact particular groups differently. It’s unacceptable.

In the past few months, I have risen in this House to talk about Black History Month and the contributions of black Canadians; the UN International Decade for People of African Descent; and the UN International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination.

I think all of us have to be aware that the demographics in this province tell a story. By 2031, racialized people here in the province of Ontario will make up 40% of the population. Two fifths of the population is a large amount.

I said back then, when I spoke in the Legislature on these issues, that it’s time for action, to build an Ontario that’s safe and that’s inclusive for everyone who lives here. It’s our obligation to create a society where racial equity is the norm, so that everyone can participate and benefit from everything Ontario has to offer.

I want to remind everyone in this Legislature that our province is not immune to racism, and I believe that a shift has taken place. We’re hearing more about racist incidents. People are more comfortably expressing their intolerance. I believe that if we don’t address this, it’s going to cost us, and I believe that in many ways, it already has cost us.

A recent report by CBC found that last year, there was a 600% jump in the use of racist language online. The top two areas for reported hate crime in the country are right here in Ontario, in Hamilton and in Thunder Bay. In fact—and this is an interesting piece that I think all members should listen to—Ontario is home to seven of the top 10 cities for police-reported hate crime in the entire country. This gives us, per capita, the highest rate of police-reported hate crime of any province.

Of these hate crimes, black Canadians are the most targeted in Canada, and indigenous, Jewish and Muslim communities are among those who are frequently targeted. The Toronto Police Service’s most recent hate crime report showed that 30% of hate crimes in 2016 were against our city’s Jewish community.

Then there are the headlines we’ve seen recently, from bomb threats forcing evacuations at Jewish community centres, to violence against indigenous women and girls, to alt-right groups like the Soldiers of Odin in Hamilton holding rallies and marches against immigration.

Last month, a 16-year-old girl in the Niagara region had her home broken into and demolished, with the N-word written all over her bedroom wall, because she was dating one of the local high school students who was black. I called her father a couple of weeks ago and offered my support, and thanked him for taking such a strong stand—a public stand—against racism.

Madam Speaker, when I hear those stories, I think to myself that this is not the 1700s, the 1800s, the 1900s, the 1960s or the 1970s. This is 2017, and this is Canada.

One of the biggest challenges we have with racism in Canada is our collective inability to talk about it. It becomes so taboo that most won’t address it. I would say that even in this Legislature, we don’t talk often about racism and the impact of racism. Even saying the word “racism” makes people think of pre-1960s America, thinking about things like white hoods in the United States and the crimes that have been committed there, but we don’t think about post-9/11 Islamophobia, present-day anti-Semitism, anti-indigenous racism or anti-black racism.

When we look at racism as just violent hate crimes, it becomes a distant problem. But racism isn’t just about hate crimes. It’s subtle and it’s very sophisticated. It’s institutionalized and systemic and becomes normalized when we don’t talk about it.

Systemic racism, in fact, is much more common today than other overt forms of racism mentioned above. Systemic racism is how systems and institutions create and perpetuate racial inequities, often as a result of hidden biases in processes that privilege some groups and disadvantage others. Even if individuals and institutions aren’t racist, systemic racism is perpetuated by assumptions and unconscious biases we have that contribute to racism. This can be a form of systemic racism that inadvertently creates unequal socio-economic outcomes for racialized people that are unfair and preventable.

Part of what makes these conversations so difficult is that when we acknowledge that there’s a problem, we have to start looking at ourselves and admit that we have a role to play in ending it. The future of our economy and society depends on our ability to get over any discomforts we have with these conversations and to jump into finding solutions. That’s why anti-racism work is so important. It’s different from other approaches because it acknowledges that systemic racism exists and actively confronts the unequal power dynamic between groups and the structures that sustain it.

Madam Speaker, I believe the future of our economy and our society depends on our ability to get over any discomfort we have with these conversations and jump right into finding solutions, and that’s why our government created the Anti-Racism Directorate, the ARD, last year and the Premier gave me the mandate to tackle systemic racism, the kind of racism that is entrenched in our institutions and creates barriers for indigenous and racialized people.

On March 7 of this year, the government introduced A Better Way Forward, which is Ontario’s three-year anti-racism strategic plan, which includes a key commitment to introduce anti-racism legislation. It outlines the concrete steps we’re taking to target systemic racism by building an anti-racism approach into the way government develops policies, makes decisions and measures outcomes.

We spent last year developing the strategic plan, but this work has taken decades and decades to get here. I want to take a moment, Madam Speaker, just to thank and acknowledge the people who have been working on anti-racism work not for five or 10 years but for decades here in the province of Ontario, many of whom are joining us here today. I want to say thank you for the work that you’ve done. Often the work that they have done fell on deaf ears. To be here today in the Legislature, with the government, with the Legislature discussing this and moving forward with legislation, I think it’s a very proud point for me personally and, I know, for many people joining us here today.

We pored over research and reports such as the Review on the Roots of Youth Violence report, the Stephen Lewis Report on Race Relations in Ontario, and the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s final report. Our process involved connecting with thousands of Ontarians who shared their views with us. We consulted with the public and impacted communities, and many anti-racism and racialized community groups called for the government to take action to address systemic racism.

Between June and December of last year, I travelled across the province and went to 10 public meetings, where thousands of Ontarians came forward to share their heartfelt stories with us about the devastating impacts of systemic racism and how racism has impacted them personally. While each individual’s experience was different, their stories all confirmed that systemic racism is still having a devastating impact on people’s lives across this province and country, and if we don’t address it, I believe it’s going to cost us even more. The call for anti-racism legislation to ensure the longevity and sustainability of the anti-racism work was a dominant theme throughout these meetings.

Colour of Poverty–Colour of Change, a coalition of groups serving the racialized community, shared the draft anti-racism bill with the Ontario government back in October 2016. This was endorsed by numerous community partners, including the Anti-Black Racism Network, the National Council of Canadian Muslims and the Taibu community health network, to mention a few.

We knew that we had to take action to make Ontario a more inclusive and more just province. A Better Way Forward: Ontario’s 3-Year Anti-Racism Strategic Plan includes an effort to reduce disparities in outcomes for indigenous and racialized people. We want to build a fair and inclusive Ontario where everyone can contribute equally to reach their full potential in this plan, and to change the narrative, to change the outcomes, to change people’s perceptions of what racism means.

First, we’re going to strengthen policy here in the province. We’re going to do better research and evaluation by collecting better race-based disaggregated data—data that can be broken down so we can monitor the impact of policies and programs on different segments of the population. We’re also establishing data standards for consistency. This will help us identify where change is needed to address disparities in outcomes. We’ll also develop a method for applying an anti-racism perspective to decision-making at the early stages.

Secondly, a key component of the plan is the proposed legislation that we’re discussing here today. If passed, this proposed legislation would ensure future sustainability and accountability of our work. We will also commit to being as transparent as possible and to share the progress of the initiatives and targets in this plan through an annual progress report.

Third, we will develop and lead targeted public education and awareness initiatives, which will focus on anti-black racism, anti-indigenous racism, anti-Semitism, Islamophobia and other forms of racism against racialized groups.

Finally, we’ll continue to work closely with indigenous and racialized communities, ministry partners and government institutions, because eliminating systemic racism cannot be done alone.

Our strategic plan has population-specific initiatives to address racism experienced by indigenous people, anti-black racism and systemic racism within Ontario’s public service, as well as Islamophobia. We’re going to use a whole-of-government approach, leveraging the work of other ministries. Once again, I just want to take a moment to thank the ministries that were involved in this process, because there were many ministries that stepped up and offered their help to look for ways to tackle systemic racism. We’re hoping to make an impact on the disparities that we see in child welfare, in education and in the justice system.

As part of our commitment to address anti-black racism, we also introduced the Ontario Black Youth Action Plan, the single largest investment into ensuring the success and bright future of young black children here in this province, which I think is a milestone that we can all be proud of. The Ontario Black Youth Action Plan will help eliminate the disparities between black youth and non-black youth at home, in classrooms, in the journey towards post-secondary education, in youth justice and in the workforce in Ontario.

The government is also taking responsibility and action to end anti-indigenous systemic racism and eliminate the barriers facing our indigenous communities. We’re working with our indigenous partners to close gaps, remove barriers, support indigenous culture and work towards truth and reconciliation.

Since last year, we’ve come a long way, but there’s no question in my mind that there is much work to be done. In the long term, we want to change people’s hearts and minds and the inequitable outcomes for racialized people in this province. In the short term, we need to implement steps that will start the ball rolling.

Our government and our Premier are completely committed to this work. That’s why we’ve developed the proposed anti-racism legislation. We recognize the critical work that the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario and the Human Rights Commission undertake under existing law. We wanted to recognize, however, that proactive anti-racism work needs a new foundation in law. The proposed legislation requires government to establish tools that will help address systemic racism.

Bill 114, the proposed Anti-Racism Act, is a key component of our anti-racism strategy. If passed, the proposed legislation will give teeth to this three-year strategy and future strategies. It holds us, as government, accountable and ensures that anti-racism work will remain a priority for the government. It would solidify our commitment to identify and combat systemic racism and would make a very important contribution to our work to build an inclusive and equitable Ontario for all.

The proposed legislation would position Ontario as a leader in this country in the fight against systemic racism.

The purpose of the proposed legislation is to establish and maintain transparent and sustainable mechanisms to identify and eliminate systemic racism and advance racial equity in Ontario. If passed, it would enable and set a sustainable approach to anti-racism across government and a wide range of public sector organizations.

The proposed anti-racism legislation, if passed, would ensure the future long-term sustainability and accountability of the government’s anti-racism work through the development of measurable targets, public reporting and mandating community engagement through renewable multi-year strategic plans. It would require the government to report publicly on the progress of its anti-racism work and remain accountable to the public.

The proposed legislation would also give the government the authority to mandate race-based data collection and the use of an anti-racism impact assessment framework across government and designated public sector organizations. This regulation-making authority allows government flexibility in implementation. We would consider evidence and consult with affected organizations before mandating race data collection and the use of an anti-racism impact assessment framework.

The proposed legislation would reinforce and increase awareness of the government’s commitment to fight systemic racism and ensure that everyone in Ontario has the opportunity to reach their full potential and to participate equally in society.

The proposed Anti-Racism Act includes four main components: first, the establishment of the Anti-Racism Directorate; second, the requirement for government to maintain an anti-racism strategy; third, a requirement to develop race data standards; and finally, a requirement to develop an anti-racism impact assessment framework.

The Anti-Racism Directorate would be established to assist the minister in carrying out these duties. Establishing the Anti-Racism Directorate in the proposed legislation is important because it would provide a home for the anti-racism work to continue.

Madam Speaker, I want to take a moment to thank the dedicated staff from the Anti-Racism Directorate who are joining us here today in the gallery, the men and women who have been working for the last year to build this. Let’s give them a big round of applause.

Applause.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Soo Wong): I want to remind our visitors in the gallery and in the east gallery: We welcome our guests, but you’re not allowed to participate in the debate, including clapping.

I return to the minister.

Hon. Michael Coteau: Madam Speaker, it’s such a passionate issue, and people are so involved in this because it’s such an important issue, but thank you for reminding us.

They’ve worked so hard over the last year—and I’ve seen it first-hand—to build the proposed legislation, the three-year strategic plan, to ensure that we as a government and members in this Legislature can move forward to create the Ontario that we envision. Thank you so much.

The government will be required to develop and publish an anti-racism strategy and set out initiatives to eliminate systemic racism and advance racial equity. The strategy would include targets and indicators to measure progress on the strategy, and it would be required to be published. To keep this work relevant, the strategy would be required to be reviewed at least every five years, at which time a new strategy would be issued, the existing strategy amended or continued.

It is important that stakeholders and community partners have input into our strategy as a government. The proposed legislation requires the minister responsible for anti-racism to consult on the development of the strategy and for the comprehensive review that must occur at least every five years. These consultations would occur with groups most impacted by systemic racism and others interested in the topic. Having an anti-racism strategy and reviewing it based on consultation will keep it current and responsive to people’s needs.

The proposed legislation would enable the collection of personal information for the purpose of identifying and monitoring systemic racism and advancing racial equity. Given the sensitivity of race-related information, the proposed legislation also includes strong privacy protections to prevent the misuse of personal information at the same level as or a higher standard than current privacy laws such as the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act and the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.

In addition, the proposed legislation provides an oversight role for the Information and Privacy Commissioner. These privacy rules would only apply if an organization is collecting personal information for the purposes of this proposed act.

The minister would be required to develop and publish data standards, subject to the Lieutenant Governor in Council’s approval, to ensure that public sector organizations are collecting data with an aligned approach and to further specify how they must protect personal information. Additionally, the Information and Privacy Commissioner and the Chief Commissioner of the Ontario Human Rights Commission would have to be consulted on the development of any potential amendments of the minister’s data standards.

The LGIC would have regulation-making authority to mandate the collection of race-related data by government and public sector organizations for specific programs and services. These organizations would be required to collect data as outlined in the data standards. This regulation-making authority allows government flexibility on implementation.

We know that this will be a change to the operations of public sector organizations and we want to make sure that we have an opportunity to consult with affected organizations prior to requiring them to collect race data. Collecting this aggregated race data is especially important in areas where we anticipate gaps in outcomes for indigenous and racialized people as compared to the general public.

While we have indications that black and indigenous children have more interactions with child welfare, for example, we need data so that we can identify and address the issues through evidence-based decision-making. This is an important piece within the legislation. This information will help us better understand the impact of programs and policies on different segments of the population. It will help us to identify patterns of bias.

The minister would be required to develop and publish an action-oriented ARIA framework, subject to cabinet’s approval, to be used in assessing, mitigating and preventing the potential adverse impact of policies and programs on racial equity. The ARIA would need to include information on processes for research and analysis, stakeholder consultations, and public reporting. Cabinet would have the regulation-making authority to mandate the use of the ARIA across government and entities for specified programs, services and functions.

We have looked at the successful impact of assessments in other jurisdictions. This framework would help us build an anti-racism approach into decision-making and plans, making it easier to prevent and remedy systemic racism.

In closing, this proposed legislation commits us to developing tools that will help us identify systemic barriers and promote equitable outcomes through our policies and our programs. I believe that this proposed legislation, if passed, will go a long way towards eliminating systemic racism in the province. Systemic racism should not hold anyone back in this province from reaching their full potential and participating in society.

We have an opportunity today to adopt proactive measures to eliminate systemic barriers that cause or help people to perpetuate systemic racism and the inequitable outcomes it creates. The proposed legislation will help us accomplish what we set out to do in our anti-racism strategic plan. If passed, the proposed legislation would ensure future sustainability and accountability for our work, which will make a tremendous difference to the lives of so many people here in the province.

I believe that all people deserve the best this province has to offer. We want to build a fair and more inclusive Ontario, where everyone can contribute equally and achieve their full potential.

I want to leave you with this last thought: We’re all in this together. We have a chance now to make a real difference. By working together, we can build a province where race doesn’t matter and doesn’t limit anyone’s social, economic and political opportunities. As we celebrate the 150th anniversary of this country in Ontario and the qualities and values that define us, let us—as a Legislature, as MPPs, as a government—make this year meaningful by taking a stand on racial equity and social inclusion, because that’s who we are. I want to ensure that all the brightest minds in this province have the support they need to be competitive in today’s market and to reach their potential.

It’s time that we, as a Legislature, work together to boldly stand up for all people in this province, to build the economy and the society that we need for tomorrow. This piece of proposed legislation gives us the courage to bridge the gaps between the vision we have for our country as a beacon for multiculturalism and inclusion and the reality of intolerance faced by racialized people.

I want to ask all members to come together and pass this proposed piece of legislation. And I want to thank everyone for listening today.

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

Ms. Harinder Malhi: I’m honoured to be here today for the second reading of Bill 114, the proposed Anti-Racism Act, 2017. I want to start off by acknowledging that we are actually gathered here today on the traditional territory of the Mississaugas of the New Credit.

I want to commend Minister Coteau and the Anti-Racism Directorate for all the work they have done in the last year, leading to the introduction of Ontario’s three-year anti-racism strategic plan, which includes a commitment to anti-racism legislation. This is a milestone that we can all be proud of. It marks a year of research, consultation and development, but it is just the beginning of a transformational effort towards eliminating systemic racism in Ontario.

I want to thank my colleague Minister Coteau for giving me the opportunity to participate in this exciting and meaningful work, which is also very near and dear to my heart. I represent the electoral district of Brampton–Springdale. The population of Brampton is 40% South Asian, and, being a racialized person myself, I understand the impacts of systemic racism first-hand. I see the need for change and that people are tired and frustrated of waiting for that change to happen. That change is starting with us, in our own backyard, as the minister said, with this proposed legislation.

If passed, this legislation will help Ontario move forward sooner rather than later in changing the status quo and building a society characterized by racial equity and social inclusion. That’s what we are all working towards. If passed, I am convinced that the proposed legislation will make a significant difference in the way we fight systemic racism in Ontario. It will give us the power and authority to support our ideas and our words with action.

Minister Coteau has given you the broad outline of the proposed legislation, and I will go into more detail. I would like to start off by reading parts of the

preamble to the proposed legislation, as it provides context and sets out the objectives and intent of the legislation. The

preamble reads:

“Everyone deserves to be treated with fairness, respect and dignity, and the government of Ontario is committed to eliminating systemic racism and advancing racial equity.

“Systemic racism is a persistent reality in Ontario, preventing many from fully participating in society and denying them equal rights, freedoms, respect and dignity.”

As the minister defined it, “Systemic racism is often caused by policies, practices and procedures that appear neutral but have the effect of disadvantaging racialized groups. It can be perpetuated by a failure to identify and monitor racial disparities and inequities and to take remedial action....

“Eliminating systemic racism and advancing racial equity supports the social, economic and cultural development of society as a whole, and everyone benefits when individuals and communities are no longer marginalized.”

Freedom, equality and fairness are the marks of a democratic society. We all want those things. We believe that, starting with government and being held accountable through legislation, we can achieve this.

There are four components to the proposed legislation, as Minister Coteau explained. These are maintaining an anti-racism strategy; collecting personal information, including race-based information; establishing an anti-racism impact assessment framework; and establishing the Anti-Racism Directorate in legislation.

Maintaining an anti-racism strategy: The proposed Anti-Racism Act requires the government of Ontario to develop and publish an anti-racism strategy that aims to eliminate systemic racism and advance racial equity, and outlines the requirements for what must be contained in that strategy. The requirements in the proposed legislation, if passed, would include initiatives to eliminate systemic racism, including systemic barriers that contribute to inequitable racial outcomes; initiatives to advance racial equity; and targets and indicators to measure the effectiveness of the strategy.

The initiatives contained in the strategy would have to target the people who are most adversely impacted by systemic racism, including the indigenous community, the black community and other racialized communities. This is a feature of the proposed Anti-Racism Act.

It provides for a long-term view that the racialization of communities can shift over time, but it recognizes that certain communities face particular barriers and inequitable outcomes due to their particular histories. The three-year anti-racism strategy fulfills part of that requirement. The targets and indicators required by the proposed legislation to make this strategy accountable would have to be established and published on an Ontario government website within 12 months of the proposed act coming into force, if passed.

Progress reports: To ensure accountability, there is a requirement in the proposed Anti-Racism Act for the minister to prepare and publish regular progress reports on the anti-racism strategy. The progress reports would have to include information related to the strategy’s initiatives, targets and indicators. For A Better Way Forward, the first progress report would be required to be prepared 12 months after targets and indicators are published. Doing so provides public accountability through public reporting, and is in line with our government’s open government principles.

A review of the anti-racism strategy: Another way of ensuring accountability in the proposed legislation is the requirement for a mandatory comprehensive review of the strategy every five years. Part of this review would require informing the public of the review and soliciting input, and undertaking consultations with community organizations, individuals, other levels of government and stakeholders. The requirement for consultations would ensure that individuals and representatives of the groups that are most adversely impacted by systemic racism are consulted.

The proposed legislation explicitly names indigenous and black communities, but it is not limited to these communities. After the comprehensive review is complete, the government could either amend the strategy, replace the strategy, or continue the existing strategy. The date from which the next strategy is established after this review would have to be clearly indicated.

Consultation on the anti-racism strategy: We are committed to consulting with members and representatives of communities that are most adversely impacted by systemic racism on a regular basis. The proposed legislation, if passed, would allow for consultation on the strategy from time to time, in between comprehensive reviews.

The proposed legislation explicitly names indigenous communities but is not limited to these. It also includes our Sikh community, our Jewish community, our Muslim community and racialized communities across Ontario.

Initiatives in this strategy could be amended as a result of these interim, unscheduled consultations, but not the targets or the indicators. This provides flexibility to add new initiatives or to amend or eliminate existing initiatives. However, the targets and indicators that are established must remain to ensure accountability.

Data standards: To address racial inequities, we need better race-based disaggregated data—data that can be broken down so that we can understand how systemic racism is impacting specific groups. The second part of the proposed legislation requires the establishment of data standards that relate to the collection of personal information for the purpose of eliminating systemic racism and advancing racial equity.

Establishing data standards helps to ensure that data is collected in line with consistent standards and provides a means for ensuring that detailed, privacy-related requirements are respected by public sector organizations. The minister would be required to establish data standards, subject to Lieutenant Governor in Council approval. The standards would set out requirements for the collection, use and management of personal information. LGIC approval would also be required for any amendment to the data standards. Privacy and human rights are fundamental principles in the standards, and it is important for us to ensure these two organizations are involved in the process.

I also want to take a moment to reiterate—and I know that Minister Coteau mentioned it—the rules to protect personal information in the proposed legislation are subjected to the same or higher standards than current laws, such as the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act and the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. There would be a requirement to consult with the Information and Privacy Commissioner and Chief Commissioner of the Human Rights Commission of Ontario to develop or amend the data standards.

The LGIC would have regulation-making authority to require or authorize public sector organizations, which includes ministries, to collect information for the purpose of eliminating systemic racism and advancing racial equity. These regulations specify particular public sector organizations and also particular programs and services or functions for which personal information would have to be collected. They would also specify which elements of the data standards are mandatory. This provides flexibility in the application of data standards.

One of the privacy protections outlined in the proposed legislation is that individuals being asked to provide personal information would not be withheld services if they refuse to provide that information.

The personal information collected under a regulation: In the proposed Anti-Racism Act, personal information is to be collected directly from the individual to whom the information relates. However, the data standards may set out criteria and requirements for when indirect collection may occur: for example, if a police officer is collecting information about a member of the public.

When information is collected directly from an individual, there are a number of requirements in the proposed legislation that a public sector organization must provide to that individual, including that the information is being collected for the purpose of eliminating systemic racism and advancing racial equity, that the service or benefit will not be withheld if the individual refuses to provide the information requested, and the information of an employee of the public sector and organization that can answer any questions about the collection of personal information the individual may have.

While the data standards can set out criteria and requirements for when indirect collection of personal information can occur, the proposed legislation sets out notice of requirements. If a public sector organization indirectly collects information about individuals, they must post a notice on a website, indicating that personal information is being collected under the authority of this proposed act, if passed.

The website notice must also indicate the types of information being collected and the manner in which the information is being collected, why the information is being collected and how it will be used, and the information of an employee of the public sector organization that can answer any questions about the collection of the personal information that the individual may have.

The personal information collected under the authority of this proposed legislation can only be used for data collection purposes of the proposed act, eliminating systemic racism and advancing racial equity. Additional limits on collection, use, security and retention of personal information are set out in the proposed legislation. As well, the data standards must provide for reporting on the use of the collected information and publication of it in a de-identified form. This disclosure will promote better identification and an understanding of systemic racism, a key goal of the proposed act.

Publishing data is about transparency and accountability to the public. Public sector organizations would not be allowed to collect more information than is reasonably necessary to meet the purpose of the proposed legislation, and would not be allowed to use personal information if other information would meet this purpose. They must de-identify personal information, as required by the data standards, and must keep personal information for the amount of time specified in the data standards, or at least one year after collection if no time is specified in the data standards.

Information and Privacy Commissioner review of practices: The proposed Anti-Racism Act, if passed, would give the Information and Privacy Commissioner an oversight role. The IPC would be authorized to review the practices of the public sector organization that is authorized or mandated to collect information. The purpose of the review would be to determine whether there has been unauthorized practice related to the collection, retention, use and disclosure, access or modification of personal information, or there has been a contravention of this proposed act.

The public sector organization would be required to co-operate with the IPC during their review, including producing information and records to the IPC.

If an individual wilfully fails to comply with the order to discontinue with a practice that has been deemed to contravene the proposed act or its regulations, or destroys the personal information that was collected under the practice, the person is considered guilty of an offence and, if convicted, could be fined up to $100,000. The prosecution would require the consent of the Attorney General.

The IPC would also have the authority to make comments or recommendations on the privacy implications of anything under this proposed act, if passed. These comments, recommendations or other matters related to this proposed act would be included in the IPC’s annual report.

The anti-racism impact assessment: The minister will also be required to develop and publish an anti-racism impact assessment framework, and the LGIC would be able to require its use by public sector organizations in respect of their programs and policies. This is the third component of the proposed legislation.

The intent of the ARIA framework is to assess the potential racial equity impacts and outcomes of policies and programs to prevent, mitigate or remedy inequitable impacts and outcomes. This includes both the development of new policies or programs and the evaluation of existing policies and programs.

In the proposed legislation, the framework would have to include the following elements: research and analysis, stakeholder and community partner consultations, and public notice and reporting. Public reporting would ensure accountability and sustainability.

The LGIC would have regulation-making authority to require public sector organizations to use all or part of the framework. The authority to mandate the use of the ARIA by government and designated organizations is critical. The regulations would specify particular public sector organizations and also particular policies or programs for which the framework must be used. This provides the government with flexibility in the application of the framework and is similar to the regulation-making authority for the data standards.

We know that this would be a change in operations, so the regulation-making approach allows the government flexibility to consult with affected organizations and target the policies and programs that may have the highest impact on racial inequity.

There’s also a requirement for publication in the proposed legislation. Documents that would be required to be established under the proposed Anti-Racism Act would also be required to be published in order to be transparent and accountable to the public. These documents include the anti-racism strategy, every progress report on the strategy, the data standards and the anti-racism impact assessment.

The fourth and final component of the Anti-Racism Act maintains the existence of the Anti-Racism Directorate and requires the directorate to assist the minister in carrying out duties set out in the proposed act, if passed.

The proposed legislation also sets out a requirement for an appropriate number of Ontario public service employees to carry out this anti-racism work. This sustains the government’s commitment to anti-racism. Long-term sustainability of the ARD was one of the most pressing concerns raised by anti-racism community partners.

The proposed Anti-Racism Act would come into force on the day that it receives royal assent.

In

summary, the provisions under the Anti-Racism Act create a sustained, comprehensive approach towards identifying, understanding and eliminating systemic racism in government and, by future regulation, a broad range of Ontario institutions, and advancing racial equity.

I truly believe that this proposed legislation, if passed by this Legislature, is a big step in the right direction and will truly help us combat systemic racism in this province. An equitable society where everyone contributes is good for all of us.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Soo Wong): Questions and comments?

Ms. Lisa MacLeod: It’s my pleasure to rise and debate today. I’ll have an opportunity to speak at greater length in a little bit, but I wanted to congratulate the minister for the work that he has been doing within the broader community of Ontario, but also the number of round tables that he did across the province with racialized communities and those who feel that they need to have an opportunity to speak out. He gave them that platform, and I congratulate him for that on behalf of the Progressive Conservative caucus.

Obviously this is becoming a bigger issue than probably it has in many years because we do see, from time to time—most of the time, in fact—online hate directed at one race or another. We see what’s happening around the world. A genocide is happening in Syria, and we know that these difficult times create a lot of fear among people.

It is up to us as legislators, in my opinion, to stand up and to talk about the positive things that are happening not only in the world but right here at home in the province of Ontario. I’ve had the opportunity in a very fast-growing riding in the city of Ottawa to welcome many new Canadians to our country, but at the same time watching our community grow and thrive together. I firmly believe that our children love each other and want to play with one another regardless of how they look.

What happens in life is that we allow people to speak with hate. We hear it and we see it on Twitter, on Facebook. We see it in the news. It’s up to us in this assembly to remember that we are here to break down those barriers. But we’re also here to ensure that the next generation grows up still retaining that wonderful, open-minded heart that they have.

I often like to point out my own daughter’s hockey team, as you all know, and the wonderful diversity there and the way that those kids play together because they only see their similarities.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Soo Wong): Questions and comments?

Mr. Gilles Bisson: As a New Democrat, I am honoured to stand and support this particular bill. It’s something that this Legislature, actually, in the past has dealt with. We had a former—under the NDP government, had put a similar organization in place. Unfortunately, it was done away with sometime after.

I want to make this comment, because I think it’s important that it be made. What we’re doing today in regard to what we’re creating is important. We need to have strategies and we have to have mechanisms in place where government does everything it can in order to beat back racism in all its forms.

All of us as individuals also have a responsibility. It happens to all of us as we’re travelling around our neighbourhoods, families and coffee shops. We at times get people who say some very ungracious things in regard to new Canadians. I think it’s incumbent upon all of us to beat that back when we see it.

It certainly happens with me. In fact, I had my staffer Kevin Modeste put together a document recently. Because of what’s going on in Syria, there seems to be an uptake in the amount of people who say, “Why are they coming here, and they’re getting everything and we get nothing?” You hear all of that rhetoric—I’ll just leave it at that, but it’s not the word I was going to use. I had a document made up that shows that new Canadians get no more than any other Canadians. In fact, they get less, and it’s harder for them to establish themselves in this country than people recognize. If we as individuals don’t push back, then it allows that lie to continue.

I’ve taken the document, and now every time I’m somewhere and somebody says, “Oh, the immigrants get more than us Canadians,” I gladly send them an email with the document and say, “If you want to discuss, I’m more than prepared to discuss it with you,” because, in fact, what’s going on in Syria today is horrifying. Could you imagine that happening to your family?

If we can’t open our borders to allow people to come to Canada who are in such a terrible situation, it’s recalling from the past what we did to the Jews when they tried to come to this country back before the Second World War. We saw what happened to them.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Soo Wong): Questions and comments?

Mr. Han Dong: Good morning, Madam Speaker. I’m very pleased to add my voice to the debate of this bill.

I’ve been listening this morning to the minister responsible for anti-racism in Ontario as well as my good colleague from Brampton–Springdale, and also my good friends across the floor from Nepean–Carleton and Timmins–James Bay. I have to tell you, this is a very heartwarming experience for me as a first-generation Canadian, coming here at the age of 13.

Systemic racism impacts us all. I’ve been invited to events and discussions organized by not just the black community, but the indigenous community, the Chinese community, the Korean community, the Portuguese community—you name it—and I hear over and over again how we need to pull together and paddle in the same direction against the current of racism, especially in this very challenging time around the world.

This I see as an opportunity for us to become a model for the world. I realize that, if passed, this act will be the first of its kind in Canada. We’re really saying loudly in action, to the rest of the country and the rest of the world, that systemic racism must be exposed and that we must, together, try—at least try—to find a solution to it.

I remember I was at a discussion—I think it was covered by a newspaper as well—where a Korean Canadian was mistaken for a Chinese Canadian and was a victim of racial slurs on the street in my riding, the Queen and Spadina area. This is not acceptable.

I am really pleased that we’re discussing this bill today.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Soo Wong): Questions and comments?

Ms. Sylvia Jones: I’m really glad that I was able to be here to hear the leadoff speeches for Bill 114. It has been a very positive hour, to hear what the minister had in mind when he presented this bill.

I have to say that this bill, while it doesn’t look very long, is in fact quite prescriptive and quite detailed. So kudos to the minister for actually bringing forward something that has a little bit of meat—

Mr. Bill Walker: Substance.

Ms. Sylvia Jones: —and substance.

I have two young children, teenagers now, and when I go home tonight and tell them what we were debating, they won’t understand. They won’t understand because kids don’t see it. Kids don’t participate in it. I guess I have great faith in our future generations.

I don’t understand what happens when we have young people who literally are colour blind, do not understand and do not participate in these very hateful stories and actions that we’re seeing around the world and in our own communities.

I acknowledge and appreciate the minister for bringing this forward. Frankly, I hope it is something that we will not have to have as our generations appreciate and understand and work forward. So congratulations, Minister.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Soo Wong): I’ll return to the minister to wrap up this round of debate.

Hon. Michael Coteau: I want to thank all the members who spoke on this: of course the members from Brampton–Springdale, Nepean–Carleton, Trinity–Spadina, Timmins–James Bay and Dufferin–Caledon. I think I mentioned everyone.

I just want to say thank you so much, because there is a cost to standing still. There’s a cost for us not to do anything. We’re seeing the change that’s taking place in this province, the change that’s taken place over the last few decades. We have an Ontario where, by 2031, 40% of the population will be racialized, and if we don’t put in place, I believe, the tools and processes that set the tone for that shift that’s taking place, I think we could find ourselves in a very bad place. We could continue to go down a pathway where we’re seeing increases of racial intolerance here in the province of Ontario.

As the minister responsible for children and youth services, I know that there are a lot of young people out there who are not reaching their full potential. There are a lot of men and women who are not reaching their full potential. Quite often, race does play a role in that reaching of someone’s potential.

Can you imagine if we built an Ontario where we maximized all of our human capital and we positioned Ontario where we could actually position all people for success? This province would radically transform. Everything that we have in this province that we’ve all been fortunate to inherit, the bountifulness of our natural resources and our population—I think if we position ourselves right as a government here in Ontario, we’ll continue over the next 150 years to build an Ontario that we can all be proud of, that affords the same opportunities to people in the future that many of us in the Legislature have been able to acquire.

Thank you so much for the support. I look forward to the continued debate.

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

Ms. Lisa MacLeod: I appreciate the opportunity, on behalf of Patrick Brown and the Ontario Progressive Conservative caucus, to debate Bill 114,

An Act to provide for Anti-Racism Measures. I will be splitting my time with the member from Scarborough–Rouge River.

All that is required for evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing. In the world today, we have seen many examples where good people have not taken action. As the minister has said, all that is required is for us to stay still, and in many cases, we cannot do that. It is up to us in this assembly to talk about the positiveness of diversity—not to extol fear among those we represent, but to look at the diversity and the positiveness of our growing communities and the communities, for example, that have been here for many decades, generations or centuries; in particular, our indigenous community and our black community.

I grew up in a small town, in New Glasgow, Nova Scotia. You’ve all heard of it, and I’ll tell you why: Viola Desmond walked into a movie theatre, the Roseland Theatre, in New Glasgow, Nova Scotia. It was a long time before I was born. But my father, who coached this amazing hockey team—and you’ll notice mostly everything I tell you is about hockey, because it has shaped my life. He had this amazing hockey team; I think they were Midget C. We had a small car. My dad used to drive this hockey team everywhere. As you would expect—and today is Tartan Day—New Glasgow, Nova Scotia, is quite a Scottish town.

We also had a very prominent black community and a very prominent Mi’kmaq community. My dad’s hockey team actually included the entire community. I got to know the kids from the Mi’kmaq community, and I got to know the kids from the black community. I don’t know if it was by design, but it was quite separate when I was growing up in the 1970s. My dad taught me all about acceptance, inclusion and commonality. When he died, they all were there for him, because he rose to the occasion of being better than the fear, the hate and the bigotry that was common at that time.

Why I want to talk about Viola Desmond is because there is a small plaque and monument to her in that town, and it’s something that my father made sure that we saw. He would also teach us about Dr. Carrie Best, who was a big civil rights leader in Nova Scotia. We grew up understanding and respecting.

For many, they would say, “Lisa, you’re from New Glasgow. You must be embarrassed.” Yes, there might be some embarrassment, and there is a black mark and a stain from what happened at the Roseland Theatre. But at the same time, the people of Nova Scotia would eventually and rightfully understand that Viola Desmond was Rosa Parks before there was a Rosa Parks.

I would be remiss not to congratulate—and I know I’m talking a little bit about Nova Scotia—a very dear friend of mine in Nova Scotia. His name is Henderson Paris. He is a civil rights leader who has run, for close to 30 years, a race against racism. He is a runner. He actually, I believe, is running for the New Democrats in Nova Scotia in their upcoming election.

I’ve been able to watch these remarkable leaders, and I’ve watched them, at a very grassroots level, break down barriers. I think that’s very important.

As I mentioned in my remarks a little bit earlier, I had the opportunity this year to be the trainer of my daughter’s hockey team. Like my father’s hockey team, it was diverse. The reason I am so passionate right now in this House is because those little girls—one’s mother was a Vietnamese refugee, a boat person, who is now a prominent journalist inside the city of Ottawa. Others have come from different countries. Some have fled persecution in different parts of eastern Europe. Then we have three young girls on our team who are South Asian. They are the most visibly racialized. I want to tell this story because it speaks to why we need to do more to combat racism.

As we walked in a small town during a hockey tournament last month, the three little girls, who are racialized and South Asian, were yelled at. They were yelled at because they looked different, they were told to go home, and they were called the N-word. Everyone’s blood boiled. Our kids don’t see the differences in the colour of skin. They don’t see the differences at all. They don’t care about what the people’s last names are on the back of the jersey. They know that they are a team, and they knew that they were responsible for one another. That level of responsibility was something that just warmed my heart.

But I will tell you, every single parent’s blood boiled when that occurred. One of the mothers of our children said, “My young son, who’s six years old, doesn’t know what that word means, so please don’t respond, and let’s move on.” It was her child who had been targeted, so we respected it.

When we talk about data, it’s incredibly important that we report it, because I will tell you this: I have mosques, synagogues, gurdwaras, temples and Christian churches in my constituency. It will come as no surprise to anybody in this room—the hate, the bigotry, the anti-Semitism and anti-Muslim bigotry that occurred in the city of Ottawa in the month of November, when it didn’t matter what type of religion you worshipped; you were under threat by vandalism and graffiti. Our community came together and said, “Enough is enough.” All of our major religions got together at the synagogue, together saying that this is not our city.

Having said that, that week—and I’m going to tell you this: That week, there were a couple of places of worship that did not report the vandalism. They didn’t want, in the same case as the mom, to scare the children of their congregations, and they didn’t want to scare their elderly, that that happened in their place of worship.

I’ll tell you, that week, one of the prominent places of worship that was targeted wasn’t reported by their religious leader; it was reported by a member of the public. I know that, for example, in my constituency, they didn’t report it to the police, but they let me know. Everyone here knows I’m very big on Twitter, so that’s how it was alerted for that particular place.

But that’s the reality we live in. It’s the reality that we have to confront each and every single day in the province of Ontario. As I said, all that is required for evil to prevail is for good people to do nothing.

I know I’m short on time here today, Speaker, and I will pick up the next day we represent this, but I want to talk at greater length about the Day of Humanity, Inclusion and Acceptance that I recently held in my community, a very diverse, growing community. I had Denise Deby there, and she is from the Ottawa Local Immigration Partnership. She provided us with a wonderful road map of where the city of Ottawa is going in terms of our diversity. I’m going to read some statistics, because I think it’s important as we have this debate on acceptance and anti-racism.

The proportion of the population with visible minority status could rise to 31% to 36%, and religious diversity is expected to increase. Speaker, 70% of newcomers to Canada are racialized. In my city, the nation’s capital—every Canadian’s second hometown, Ottawa—it’s 23%, or 202,000 people, who were born outside of Canada. Of our nearly one million people in the nation’s capital, nearly 20% belong to a visible minority or racialized group. That will grow to 36% by 2031. We have more than 100 ethnicities with more than 70 languages spoken.

I think that’s an incredible testament to how welcoming and warm Canada is, but at the same time, it proves we must continue to battle systemic racism, anti-Semitism, anti-Muslim bigotry, and all types of hate.

I just want to conclude, Speaker; I know you’re about to cut me off. I just want to say that as Ontarians and as Canadians, we have a wonderful country, one to be very proud of. But there is always more work to be done. I’ll look forward to picking up where I left off.

Second reading debate deemed adjourned.

The Deputy Speaker (Ms. Soo Wong): Seeing as it’s almost 10:15, I will recess the House until 10:30.

The House recessed from 1012 to 1030.

Introduction of Visitors

Mrs. Gila Martow: I’m very pleased that we have some wonderful people here today from CIJA. The Diller teens will be meeting with me as well as some other MPPs today. We have: Afek Katz, Almog Elimelech—melech is “king” in Hebrew—Amit Alon, Anna Karapetyan, Bar Baron, Idan Aharon, Ido Perkal, Itai Mizrahi, Ofir Ken-Li, Osher Tachan, Ron Malka, Rony Kaufman, Shalev Levi, Shay Levy, Shay Rommer, Shoval Green, Stav Vaknin, Tahel Dicapua, Yuval Abargil, Yuval Guetta, Yuval Shmuel; Raquel Binder, Richard Summers, Shir Spektorman, who are staff; and Madi Murariu, Marlee Mozeson and Cindy Osheroff, all CIJA staff. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Ms. Cheri DiNovo: I just want to add my voice to the member from Thornhill’s. On behalf of Andrea Horwath and the New Democratic Party, I want to welcome the Diller Teen Fellows program from Israel today. They are students in grade 10 and 11 dedicated to excellence, pluralism, responsibility, partnership and peoplehood. They will be coming in very shortly. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mr. Harinder S. Takhar: The page from my riding, Max Koh, is the page captain today, and his mother, Amy Ho, is in the Legislature. I want to welcome the page’s mother to the Legislature.

Mr. Lorne Coe: I would like to welcome teachers and students from Donald A. Wilson Secondary School in Whitby. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mr. Grant Crack: I have a special announcement today. I’d like to welcome the Speaker of the House here today—it’s the Speaker’s birthday, everybody. Let’s ask everybody to give him a hand. If I could have a page come, and we could give him a card. Happy birthday.

Applause.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Stop the clock. My wife asked me what I wanted for my birthday. I said an absolutely heckle-free question period.

The member from Nepean–Carleton.

Ms. Lisa MacLeod: Just another point of order, Speaker: Saturday is also the birthday of my colleague from Wellington–Halton Hills, Ted Arnott.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Happy birthday.

Further introductions? The Minister of Housing.

Hon. Chris Ballard: Thank you, Speaker. Happy birthday.

I’m really delighted to welcome Rebecca Huang, a constituent from the great riding of Newmarket–Aurora. Welcome.

Hon. Helena Jaczek: Our page captain today is Ayesha Basu from my riding of Oak Ridges–Markham. I would like to welcome her family to Queen’s Park today: parents Sonia and Anin Basu, and a former page, her sister Rhea Basu. Welcome to Queen’s Park.

Mrs. Cristina Martins: Happy birthday, Speaker.

I want to join my colleagues the members from Thornhill and Parkdale–High Park in also welcoming the Diller Teen Fellows who are joining us here today at Queen’s Park from Eilat, Israel, whom I will have the pleasure of meeting with later this afternoon. Welcome.

Hon. Bill Mauro: Speaker, happy birthday to the biggest Montreal Canadiens fan in the Legislature.

It gives me great pleasure to introduce, in the members’ east gallery, visiting from Thunder Bay, my son, Dustin Mauro, who happens to be going to a Toronto Maple Leafs game tonight. We’ll see how that all works out, but I welcome him.

Mr. Gilles Bisson: I’d like to welcome my good friends from Constance Lake who are here: Chief Allen and a number of members from the community. Welcome.

Hon. David Zimmer: I too would like to introduce visitors from Constance Lake First Nation: Chief Rick Allen, Councillor Norman Solomon, Councillor Robyn Bunting, and youth representative Austin Baxter. Thank you for travelling down.

Mr. Jim Wilson: Just an important announcement, Mr. Speaker: My colleague the member for Nepean–Carleton, Ms. MacLeod, has just been named by Catherine Clark on her list as one of #150GreatPeople in the Ottawa area.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Congratulations.

Mr. Taras Natyshak: I just wanted to welcome two members of OPSEU corrections who are here visiting today: Rob Wilson and Ian Moroun.

Wearing of pins

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs on a point of order.

Hon. Jeff Leal: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker: Forty years ago, the Honourable Bill Newman, who was the Minister of Agriculture and Food in the administration of Premier William Davis, started the Foodland Ontario logo. I believe you will find that we have unanimous consent that all members be permitted to wear pins in recognition of the 40th anniversary of Foodland Ontario.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs is seeking unanimous consent to wear the pins for the 40th anniversary. Do we agree? Agreed.

The leader of the third party on a point of order.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: I seek unanimous consent for the immediate second and third readings, and passage of, Bill 106,

An Act to amend the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006 to extend rules governing rent increases to certain types of rental units, tabled by my colleague the member for Toronto–Danforth.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The leader of the third party is seeking unanimous consent for second and third readings. Do we agree? I heard a no.

Oral Questions

Youth employment

Mr. Patrick Brown: My question is for the Minister of Finance. This government loves to paint a rosy picture about the state of Ontario’s economy, but yesterday a report on CBC confirmed that Ontario has the second-worst economy for young people in the country.

Why are the Liberals failing Ontario’s youth and the next generation? Why are they not giving young people hope and opportunity in the province of Ontario?

Hon. Charles Sousa: I appreciate the question. I recognize that all of us are concerned about ensuring that Ontario grows inclusively for all. We are outpacing the G7. We’re leading the way in Canada. We outpaced the average of the United States. Growth in jobs in our economy has been over 100,000 annually—over 720,000 since the depths of the recession. These are important factors.

More importantly, we need to continue to invest in our young people. That’s why we’ve invested heavily in skills and training. That’s why we’ve taken more steps towards university and college and post-secondary; that’s why we’ve put more into trades—all of which is helping our young people succeed. We recognize that youth unemployment has been a dramatic issue across the world, including the United States and other parts of Canada. We need to lower that unemployment rate for our young people. We need to foster experiential learning. I commend our Deputy Premier, who has taken extraordinary steps to do just that.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Patrick Brown: Mr. Speaker, I was hoping I’d get a response from the Minister of Finance about this report, which says that it’s not just the world; Ontario is the second-worst in Canada in terms of young people and the economy. That’s not a record you should be proud of. Whatever the government has been doing for 14 years, it’s not working for young people.

The report, part of Generation Squeeze’s Code Red campaign, noted that in recent years, full-time earnings have fallen for young people in Ontario by $4,600. That’s putting young people below the national average when it comes to income for full-time work. This is causing young people to put off important milestones, according to the report.

Mr. Speaker, this is not encouraging for Ontario’s youth. The second-worst economy for young Canadians is in the province of Ontario. What is this Minister of Finance going to do about that? Will he make sure young people are not let down in this province?

Hon. Charles Sousa: We all recognize that we need to invest in skills in our highly trained workforce to ensure that our young people are prepared for the jobs of tomorrow. The member opposite has oftentimes gone back to the glory days of assembly-line work, with smokestacks and the manufacturing of the past. We need to embrace the future. They may want to go back to coal; they want to go back to the days when people weren’t as skilled and as trained for the necessary jobs of tomorrow.

We’re doing that, Mr. Speaker. We’re doing that through the work that is being done by all of the universities across Ontario, and the leadership taken by Kitchener-Waterloo, Toronto and Ottawa on new innovations and new techniques in agri-food processing and in clean tech—clean tech, which is a future for many young people that the member opposite actually does not agree with. We need to ensure that our young people are prepared for those future opportunities—

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

Mr. Patrick Brown: Again to the Minister of Finance: I’m shaking my head at that response. It was absurd. We get a response on coal when we have a CBC report here, Generation Squeeze, talking about the fact that young people are struggling in Ontario more than almost anywhere else in Canada, where you’ve seen that full-time earnings have fallen by $4,600 and where there are jobs available in Ontario that this government is not equipping young people for. The chamber of commerce report showed that we lose billions each year for jobs available in Ontario that young people aren’t equipped for.

Rather than talk about coal or nothing related to the question, what I would appreciate is an answer from the Minister of Finance on this report that was published in the CBC that shows young people in Ontario are falling behind. What is the Minister of Finance going to do to make sure young people in Ontario aren’t put last in Canada by this government?

Interjections.

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

Mr. John Yakabuski: Stop abandoning the young people.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): There goes my birthday present.

Minister of Finance.

Hon. Charles Sousa: The fact is that youth employment actually rose by 7,500 in February 2017, and the youth unemployment rate actually went down by 1.7%. But more can be done. It’s why we are trying to reduce the skills gap with a highly skilled workforce.

I’ve got to tell you, Mr. Speaker: The Employment Ontario network has now helped approximately one million Ontarians, many young people, since 2015-16, including 122,800 employees across Ontario. We’re investing $173 million in 2016-17 to offer a range of programs that support apprentices, employers and trained delivery agents. In April 2015, the government also invested $55 million over three years to help the next generation of skilled tradespeople. As a result of the government’s investments and support of the apprenticeship programs, new apprenticeship registrations have grown by 17,100 and more than 25,000 in 2015-16.

More needs to be done, Mr. Speaker. We are doing our utmost, and we put so in the budget—

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

New question.

Sexual violence and harassment

Ms. Laurie Scott: My question is to the Minister of the Status of Women. Can I count on the minister’s support for my bill requiring that judges be educated about how to properly handle sexual assault cases?

Hon. Indira Naidoo-Harris: The Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services.

Hon. Marie-France Lalonde: It gives me great pleasure. I thank the member for her question. Sexual assault is a very, very serious issue that demands attention from all levels of government. I have to say, as the Attorney General has said before, that this is a non-partisan issue, Mr. Speaker. The Attorney General has made it clear that we are actively looking into what more can be done about sexual assault education for judges. The Chief Justice has reassured the Attorney General that the ongoing education of our judiciary is critically important to public confidence in the system.

The court has provided education on issues related to sexual assault and violence against women for over 30 years. I also know that Ontario judges have access to the federal training programs offered by the National Judicial Institute and can directly benefit from these new supports.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Ms. Laurie Scott: I’d like to go back to the Minister of the Status of Women, because I know she, in particular, must be aware of the importance of this kind of training.

There are still incredible stigmas attached to sexual assault. Sexual assault is chronically underreported in Canada, with about 90% of women never bringing their cases forward. Our judges should have the tools they need to treat these cases with the utmost sensitivity. I’ve spoken with many women’s and victims’ services organizations, and all of them support mandatory sexual assault law training.

This is a non-partisan issue. We must protect women from being revictimized, especially after having the bravery to come forward about their experiences in the first place.

Since this Attorney General has not been clear where he stands on this issue, I’m wondering if I can count on the support of the Minister of the Status of Women to convince him of the importance and help move these changes forward?

Hon. Marie-France Lalonde: Again, I thank the member for her question. I have to say, I think the Attorney General has made it very clear that we’re actively looking into what more can be done about sexual assault education for judges. We are actively looking into what more can be done. As the member has mentioned and as we’re saying, this is a non-partisan issue. I thank the member for her question, and we’ll—thank you very much.

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): I want to hear.

Final supplementary?

Ms. Laurie Scott: Well, Mr. Speaker, I believe the Minister of the Status of Women was trying to answer my previous question, so I will go back to her again.

I want to share a story that Rona Ambrose shared in the federal Parliament. It’s that of a Halifax taxi driver who was acquitted of sexual assault charges. The judge in question ruled that “clearly, a drunk can consent.” We know that not to be true, as countless legal experts have torn that ruling to shreds.

We can’t have such basic mistakes being made in our courts. Will this government mandate sexual assault training before Ontario has a case as egregious as the one in Nova Scotia?

Hon. Marie-France Lalonde: Again, thank you very much for the supplementary. I have to say that this is a very important issue. I think that we all agree. I know a colleague here in the House, the member from Davenport, has also been and is a strong advocate for this. I want to say thank you, actually, to the member from Davenport for her interest in this very important area. As a member of this House, she has the right and the responsibility to raise important issues affecting her constituents, and we look forward to renewing—

Interjections.

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

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member from Lambton–Kent–Middlesex, come to order.

Finish, please.

Hon. Marie-France Lalonde: I have to end by saying that I actually look forward—I think we all do look forward—to reviewing the bill once it is tabled in the Legislature, and the ongoing dialogue and debates—

Ms. Sylvia Jones: It was, yesterday.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member from Dufferin–Caledon, come to order.

You have a wrap-up sentence, please.

Hon. Marie-France Lalonde: Again I’ll say that as a member of this House, as a woman, as a mother, I know how this issue is sensitive and important, and I know that we can do more.

Tenant protection

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My question is for the Acting Premier. The Premier said this week that reports of some residents in Toronto seeing their rents double are “unacceptable.” This morning I called for unanimous consent to pass a bill that would make this unacceptable practice illegal now.

The Premier’s Liberal government said no to stopping the unfair gouging right away. Why?

Hon. Deborah Matthews: Well, thank you, Speaker, and happy birthday.

The Premier has been clear many, many times and the Minister of Housing has been clear that we are moving forward with a plan to address unfair increases in rental costs. She has made that clear. The NDP know that we have said that. We’re actually happy that we’re on the same page when it comes to helping families who are feeling the pinch of a rental market struggling to keep up with demand.

I can tell you that our plan will go further and do more than the NDP is proposing. The political games that are being played are not particularly helpful. We are looking forward to introducing a bill that will actually address a larger problem.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Once again, after 14 years of doing nothing, this Premier and her Minister of Housing have admitted that there’s a problem. This morning we did something very simple and we asked for the Premier’s Liberal government to close the 1991 rent control loophole today, to protect tenants from unscrupulous landlords. This should have been a no-brainer, Speaker.

Are the Liberals allowing more renters to be ripped off while we wait for their bill because they fear that supporting the bill currently before the House won’t give them enough political credit?

Hon. Deborah Matthews: To the Minister of Housing.

Hon. Chris Ballard: Thank you to the leader of the third party for the question. Again, as the Premier has said and made clear many times, along with myself, we will be bringing forward a plan that addresses these unfair increases in rental costs—

Interjection: When?

Hon. Chris Ballard: As I’ve said time and time again in this House and outside this House, sooner rather than later.

Mr. Speaker, there is a whole host of things that we will be bringing forward. The plan of the third party is a one-issue-only idea. We have been looking at the RTA, the Residential Tenancies Act, since last June, so that we can bring forward a very robust change.

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: It is one issue: It’s the issue that people are getting double rent increases and they can’t afford them. That’s the issue, and there’s a simple fix. Clearly, the Liberal government is playing partisan games with this issue. Sadly, it’s what Ontarians have come to expect from the Liberals.

What do the Liberals have to say? What do they have to say to those people who will see their rents double in the coming days, the coming weeks, while the Liberals drag their feet to score some political points before the next election?

Hon. Chris Ballard: It’s wonderful that the NDP have finally come to the table to talk about this. We’ve been working on this for many, many months. The rent control, the RTA: Since last June, we’ve been looking at this. So why don’t we just stop the games on the other side and move forward together? Let’s help Ontarians realize their dream of having an affordable place to call home. Politics has no place when it comes to finding people a good place to live.

Tenant protection

Ms. Andrea Horwath: My next question is for the Acting Premier. Look, the Premier and her minister have admitted that renters need help. Apparently they’ve been working on it for a year. Well, in the meantime, time has been ticking and people are losing their apartments because of economic evictions. But given the chance to do the right thing this morning, they said no. I guess they said no because there’s just not enough in it for them.

Will the Acting Premier tell us how many Ontarians are going to lose their apartments due to excessive rent increases while they wait for the Liberal government to do the right thing?

Hon. Deborah Matthews: Minister of Housing.

Hon. Chris Ballard: Thank you to the leader of the third party for this continuing dialogue, because it allows me to be able to stand up—

Interjections.

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

Hon. Chris Ballard: Thank you, Speaker. It allows me to remind the leader of the third party that we are going to do more than simple rent control. That is a key part of what we are bringing in: the expansion of rent control. But we have been studying a whole host of surrounding issues through the Residential Tenancies Act and we’ll be moving forward with some pretty significant changes in the near future.

We’ve said this time and again: I really wish the politics would stop on the other side. I really wish that the party opposite, the third party, would stop playing politics and really focus on making sure people have a good place—

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

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Well, Speaker, since the Premier and her party refuse to allow a bill to pass today that would protect renters and they seem unconcerned with the number of people that will be hurt waiting for the Liberals to finally do the right thing, will the Acting Premier at the very least tell renters that the Liberal bill, when it eventually gets here, will in fact be retroactive and cover the folks receiving rent increases this week and next week and the week after that while they are busy looking out for their own political interests?

Interjections.

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

Minister?

Hon. Chris Ballard: Thank you, Speaker. You know—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Hang on. There.

Minister?

Hon. Chris Ballard: What I want to talk about now is that looking at the whole Residential Tenancies Act since last June entailed us travelling across Canada, talking to landlords, talking to tenants about what needed to be changed. We will have a robust package of change that we’ll bring forward, along with expanding rent controls. It’s not as simple as just doing one. You have to do a whole bunch of them.

But while I’m at it, I can walk through a whole list of things that this government has done to ease the burden on renters and affordable housing. We’ve made secondary streets legislation. We’ve passed inclusionary zoning. We’ve frozen the municipal tax on rental properties. We’ve doubled the maximum refund for first-time home buyers. Mr. Speaker, we’re collecting data. We’re working with the federal government to get it done.

Interjections.

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

The leader of the third party.

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Speaker, when there is a crisis, the government has to act quickly, and there is a crisis in the rental housing market today in Ontario. But the Premier seems more concerned with doing what’s best for the Liberal Party, as opposed to what’s right for Ontarians. She refuses to tell people what she is going to do or when she’s going to do it. But renters are suffering right now.

Instead of playing politics at the expense of hard-working Ontarians, will the Liberals commit today to retroactive legislation that will protect renters now facing huge increases and the loss of their homes?

Interjections.

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

Minister?

Hon. Chris Ballard: Thank you, Speaker. And I should say happy birthday as well.

Again, I’ll go back to what the Deputy Premier started her comments with. The Premier has made it clear many times that we’re moving forward with a plan to address unfair increases in rental costs. The NDP know that. The third party knows that. We appreciate that we’re on the same page. We’re delighted that they’re on the same page with us.

When it comes to helping families who are feeling the pinch of the rental market and who are struggling to keep up—and a market that’s struggling to keep up with demand—as we said at the outset, our plan will go further and do more than what the NDP is proposing. It’s not the first time we’ve seen the NDP play political games on important issues like this.

Hydro rates

Mr. Todd Smith: Speaker, good morning, and happy birthday.

My question is for the Deputy Premier this morning. Big trouble for a GTA employer: Kisko Freezies has more than 200 employees here in Toronto and saw their hydro bill go up $100,000 last year—$100,000. According to their president, they don’t qualify for the government’s hydro scheme. He said, “We get nothing back—we pay and pay.”

Speaker, how many more jobs is this Liberal government going to chase out of Ontario before they do something for our job creators?

Hon. Deborah Matthews: The Minister of Energy.

Hon. Glenn Thibeault: I’m very pleased to rise and talk about our plan, the one that’s actually going to help 500,000 small businesses and farms right across the province. Let’s not forget, too, that the Minister of Economic Development and I were in Brampton just this morning talking about how another company is going to be saving 20%, or $2 million, on their electricity bill. All of this is part of our Ontario fair hydro plan, a plan that is actually going to be put into effect by this summer to make sure that we can help everyone right across the province.

Unlike the party opposite, that has no plan—we heard that they once had a five-point plan and then a three-point plan. And now, Mr. Speaker, they have no plan—no plan for hydro; no plan for Ontario. We are the government that acts and helps businesses.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Todd Smith: Speaker, this is the government that has bungled this file like no other file that we have ever seen. And they have the audacity to stand here and expect us to clean it up for them. Their plan has so many holes in it, it’s like Swiss cheese.

Speaker, Kisko Freezies creates jobs here in Ontario. They actually go out there and create jobs at their suppliers as well. They source their corrugated containers, their plastic and most of their supplies right here in Ontario. But their CEO told Global News this week that “more and more businesses are going to pack up and move to the United States....”

We know there is a coalition of concerned manufacturers in Ontario hanging on by a thread, so why doesn’t your latest scheme help fix that for those employers here in Ontario?

Hon. Glenn Thibeault: I’m very pleased to rise and talk about that specific company. They qualify now, Mr. Speaker, thanks to our program, because they actually have 600 kilowatts of power. We confirmed with Alectra, their electric company, that they qualify for the ICI program.

So we have a plan that’s helping businesses. They have no plan. They’re too busy writing hockey policy and not worrying about the people of Ontario. We are worrying about the people of Ontario. We are making sure that we are addressing this issue and helping these businesses.

We’re building infrastructure—the 427. The MPP from Vaughan, the Minister of Transportation, is working hard so that this business will see access to this. We’re making sure that they got access to the ICI program.

They can keep talking about hockey policy. We’ll keep working for the people of Ontario.

Executive compensation

Mr. Peter Tabuns: Speaker, for the second time in about a week, the Minister of Energy has defended outrageous salaries for hydro executives.

Hon. Deborah Matthews: Who is this question to?

Mr. Peter Tabuns: Sorry—to the Minister of Energy.

The CEO of the privatized Hydro One now makes six times the salary of his predecessor. The CEO of OPG made over $2 million last year, even though the CEO of Hydro-Québec somehow makes do with less than a third of that.

But the Minister of Energy thinks it’s okay for CEOs to extract these outrageous salaries from their customers. Is this why the minister thinks it’s okay for private investors to drive up hydro bills so they can extract outrageous profits from the ratepayers of Ontario?

Hon. Glenn Thibeault: I’m pleased to rise and comment once again on recognizing that—yes, Mr. Speaker, we’ve all acknowledged that these are high salaries. But when it comes to OPG, the one individual that the honourable member mentioned is the individual who is actually running our nuclear facilities. We want to ensure that we have the best in the world to make sure that our nuclear facilities stay safe. We also want to ensure that our nuclear facilities in refurbishment right now at Darlington are on time and on budget. The work that our executive team at OPG is doing is keeping them ahead of

schedule and under budget. That’s fantastic news because all of those savings go back to ratepayers.

When we’re talking about salaries, we’re not even talking about a cent that would be on anybody’s bills. We’re looking at making sure that we’re taking 25% off all bills, and we’re going to do that, come summer.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary.

Mr. Peter Tabuns: Back to the Minister of Energy: The values of those who think these outrageous CEO salaries are acceptable are the same values of those who think it’s acceptable to drive hydro bills up to the point where people have difficulty paying them. Ontario used to have a hydro system that reflected our public values, but the PCs and the Liberals have replaced this with a system based on different values: a system based on private profit, not public good.

Will the minister restore the public values of Ontario’s hydro system and stop the sell-off of Hydro One?

Hon. Glenn Thibeault: The system that he’s talking about, Mr. Speaker, when they were in power and when the Conservatives were in power—their system—they let it actually disintegrate. They let it fall apart. We had to invest $50 billion—let me say that again, $50 billion—to ensure that we have a reliable system. Now they want to go back to the way it was. It’s like they want to be like the PCs and bring back coal.

We actually eliminated coal. That is like taking seven million cars off the road, investing—

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member from Hamilton East–Stoney Creek, come to order.

Carry on.

Hon. Glenn Thibeault: This government is not looking back. This government is looking forward. We’re creating jobs. We’re building Ontario up. We’re lowering electricity bills for everyone. We won’t look to the past, like our opposition parties.

Agri-food industry

Mr. Mike Colle: I have a question for the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Affairs.

Minister, one of the things that Ontarians really appreciate is the safe, clean, fresh and wholesome food that they can get at their local grocery stores across Ontario. They love the fact that they can go into a grocery store and be assured that you have local farmers producing food that is produced locally and provides jobs and that they can eat that local food.

I know that, recently, some people have said, “What more can we do to ensure that we not only invest in our local farmers”—like Gwillimdale Farms up there in Bradford—“and our local green grocers to make sure that Ontarians appreciate the locally grown cabbages, beets, potatoes and carrots and not always depend on foreign”—

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Thank you. The Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs.

Hon. Jeff Leal: I want to thank the member from Eglinton–Lawrence for that question this morning. I’ve had the opportunity to tour the member’s riding. What is always very impressive is the number of backyard gardens in many of the homes in the riding of Eglinton–Lawrence.

Buying and supporting local food creates jobs and supports economic growth in communities right across the province.

All 107 members in this House should be extremely proud that we have 52,000 family farms in the province of Ontario. We produce more than 200 different foods and commodities that cater to the diversity of our population.

Mr. Speaker, since its inception with then-agriculture minister Bill Newman, the Foodland Ontario brand is turning 40 this year and serves as our government’s primary tool to inform Ontarians of the many local food options they have access to when buying their groceries and, increasingly, when eating out.

Foodland Ontario is one of the most recognized brands in the world today—

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Hon. Jeff Leal: —so, Mr. Speaker—

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): No, no, no. Supplementary.

Mr. Mike Colle: Yes, and I know that Foodland Ontario is celebrating its 40th year.

If you’re talking about backyard gardens, you’ll see that in my riding, what’s being grown now in the backyards is garlic, because garlic is now selling for $400 a bushel. Therefore, they see the opportunity to have that locally grown garlic replace that foreign garlic that is no good. So we’ve got to encourage local food.

I want to say that when I was in my local grocery store, Lady York, there was somebody complaining about cauliflower for 10 bucks. I said, “Forget the California cauliflower. You can buy a bag of Ontario potatoes for $2.99.” Those are Ontario potatoes.

Interjections.

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

Minister?

Hon. Jeff Leal: I appreciate the supplementary from the member from Eglinton–Lawrence. Perhaps we should have an emergency debate this afternoon on whether a tomato is a fruit or a vegetable.

I know that all of us here today are particularly proud of what’s grown in Ontario, and Ontarians should take this opportunity to celebrate the 40th anniversary of the Ontario Foodland rollout.

For my friend the member from St. Catharines, who’s a high-tech guy, I also encourage everyone to join the conversation online using the #Foodland40 or #loveONTfoods hashtags and check in on the 40 ways to celebrate local food that will be featured throughout the year.

Hydro charges

Mr. Monte McNaughton: My question this morning is to the energy minister. A very sad story from my riding: A constituent in the town of Glencoe lost their house to a fire on January 8 of this year. But what followed in February was salt in the wound: a hydro bill for delivery of absolutely no energy after the removal of the hydro meter in the amount of $35.

But Speaker, what really set off alarm bells was the following month, when this constituent received yet another bill, this time for $193.55, which stated that Hydro One read the meter on February 28, 2017. To be clear, Hydro One claimed to have read a meter that was not there and presented a bill on the basis of this fictitious reading.

Speaker, does the Liberal government think it’s right to charge someone for hydro whose house was burned down and no longer exists?

Hon. Glenn Thibeault: That is a problem that should—

Interjections.

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

Mr. John Yakabuski: You’ve got to read a lot of meters to be paid $4.5 million, I’ll tell you.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Member from Renfrew–Nipissing–Pembroke, come to order.

Minister of Energy.

Hon. Glenn Thibeault: As I was saying, that’s awful for that family. I know it must be difficult for them to be going through that. One of the things that I would suggest, Mr. Speaker, is that they follow up with Hydro One, because Hydro One has been correcting those issues. That’s the one thing that they’ve been doing—

Ms. Andrea Horwath: Oh, yes, they can’t go to the Ombudsman anymore, can they?

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

Hon. Glenn Thibeault: That’s the one thing they have been doing, Mr. Speaker: enhancing their customer service. When you hear things like this, of course no one agrees with it. That’s why Hydro One has been acting quickly to ensure that they can fix and correct issues like this.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary.

Mr. Monte McNaughton: Back to the energy minister: The bill that followed the fake meter reading isn’t just an issue for this constituent; it actually has costs for all taxpayers in Ontario as well. Through the Ontario Electricity Support Program, taxpayers were on the hook for almost $100 on top of the almost $200 the ratepayer was charged.

How can this Liberal government expect people to trust that energy prices are fair for families and businesses when people are being told that their distributor is reading a meter that no longer exists, executive salaries are through the roof, and the cost of cap-and-trade is hidden?

Hon. Glenn Thibeault: Once again, we feel for that family and, of course, hope everything is working well for that family.

Again, as I’ll say, Hydro One’s new management team recognized in the past that their customer service needed improvement. The Ombudsman actually brought forward many recommendations that the Hydro One management team and Hydro One staff have been acting upon.

I again would encourage my friend opposite to have that family call Hydro One immediately. That is something that will be rectified as quickly as possible because it is one of the important things that Hydro One is doing. The team there is very proud to say that they’re working to change that dynamic, and I would hope that he tells them to follow up on that.

Lyme disease

Ms. Sarah Campbell: My question is to the Acting Premier. After a 10-year tick host study conducted across Ontario revealed that Corkscrew Island, located 20 kilometres southwest of Kenora, has the highest infection prevalence of Lyme disease ever reported in Canada, a research study last year determined that Lyme disease was found in eight species of ticks, with 41% testing positive for Lyme, a disease with no cure. This research is a bombshell for people living in the northwest. Despite its author sending a copy to the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care last November, the government has not so much as even notified the public about it.

The people in Kenora and across the northwest are worried about contracting Lyme disease, and far too many are already suffering with this debilitating disease. Why is this government not acting on a health crisis that is greatly affecting northerners?

Hon. Deborah Matthews: Minister of Health and Long-Term Care.

Hon. Eric Hoskins: Lyme disease is a disease that is affecting many, many parts of this province and many Ontarians.

It’s an important issue and it’s the reason why, in July of last year, Ontario launched the combatting Lyme disease through collaborative action plan, which is a 10-step education and awareness plan, partly to deal with this specific issue that has been referenced with regard to the north: to help Ontarians understand the risk that exists in many parts of this province, including in the north, but also the steps that they can take as individuals, as parents and as owners of animals as well, because this is a disease that affects humans and animals, and domesticated pets.

But certainly when it comes to human infection, there are important measures that can and need to be taken to prevent as well as treat individuals who are infected.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary.

Ms. Sarah Campbell: What we already know about chronic Lyme disease is that it is a horrific disease with the potential to affect every system in the body and that it can result in paralysis. We also know that the most effective prevention of Lyme disease, once a tick has been attached for more than 24 hours, is to quickly treat it within 72 hours after it’s removed. The problem is that the government doesn’t have a strategy in place to treat Lyme disease and not all physicians are versed in the best treatment options.

Nearly three years ago, in 2014, this House passed a motion from the member from Algoma–Manitoulin calling on the government to create a comprehensive and integrated Lyme disease strategy for Ontario, but it still hasn’t happened.

Minister, the risk of Lyme disease is at potentially crisis levels in Kenora. When is this government going to develop not just an awareness plan but a concrete and robust strategy on Lyme disease to protect the people in the northwest and families all across this province?

Interjections.

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

Minister?

Hon. Eric Hoskins: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is true that the member from Algoma–Manitoulin has been very vocal about this issue. We’ve had many conversations—I think, in a collaborative way. I’ll be meeting with him and some stakeholders who are concerned about this issue in the coming weeks.

In addition to that action plan that I referenced—and there is federal action taking place as well, because this is an issue that doesn’t just affect Ontario—last year we also created a Lyme disease stakeholder group to lead a review on existing Lyme disease issues. We are working with Public Health Ontario to update on all elements of Lyme disease—prevention as well as treatment, education and awareness, including of health care professionals.

I agree with the member opposite that this is a multi-faceted issue. The Minister of Climate Change reminded me that when it comes to the north, as well, climate change plays an aspect. We need to look at it in a multifactorial way.

Grandview Children’s Centre

Mr. Granville Anderson: My question is for the Minister of Children and Youth Services.

We know that this government has shown time and time again their commitment to supporting children across this great province. As the MPP for Durham, I am grateful that the government continues to support special needs so that children’s centres like Grandview can help children and youth to succeed.

Two of Grandview’s satellite locations are located in my riding of Durham: one in Port Perry, and the other in Bowmanville. The staff and families I have met are formidable, and I am extremely supportive of the important role they play in our community. But, despite all their great work, the families supported by Grandview are constrained by the amount of space available for treatment. There is an overwhelming need for an expansion of Grandview that brings all locations together under one roof.

Speaker, through you to the minister: Can you please share what you’ll be doing to make sure that Grandview has the space to expand their services and continue to do the great work that they’re doing in support of our children?

Hon. Michael Coteau: I want to take a moment to thank the member for his question. As a former chair of a school board and with the work he has done around FASD and education, he’s a strong advocate for the children in his community of Durham.

Mr. Speaker, since 2008-09, my ministry has invested over $312 million of capital funding into children’s treatment centres.

I want to take a moment to recognize the great work that Grandview is doing. I also know that many of my colleagues, including MPP Dickson and MPP MacCharles, recognize the important work that they do.

At my most recent visit to Grandview, I met with family, staff and children. They shared stories with me of the incredible growth that’s taking place in their region and the supports needed for the children at Grandview. They also stressed that there just wasn’t enough space to deliver the types of services that children need. They wanted to do more, but they couldn’t.

Grandview’s capital request continues to be one of my top priorities, and a decision will be coming soon.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Granville Anderson: Thank you to the minister for sharing your experiences with the staff, children and families of Grandview. I would have to agree with you, it is truly a remarkable centre. They are doing great work to support young people in Ontario. As I mentioned earlier, Grandview has two satellite locations in my riding, and I see first-hand the great work being done by the staff to support young people in Durham.

Speaker, through you to the minister: Can you tell us about your most recent visit to Grandview Children’s Centre and share some of the incredible things they are doing to help young people to succeed?

Hon. Michael Coteau: Thank you again—and happy birthday, Mr. Speaker.

As soon as the Legislature recessed for winter break, I made it a priority to visit Grandview Children’s Centre. It is truly a remarkable centre. The staff at Grandview do great work every day, and I’d like to thank them for their dedication to helping children. They help young people increase their ability to participate at home, at school, in the community, and they prepare them to achieve their goals for adulthood.

I value the services provided by Grandview and their continued commitment to providing support for children, youth and families.

Mr. Speaker, as a government, we want to make sure that we provide the types of supports that allow young people to reach their full potential, and that families are supported.

Highway improvement

Mr. Jim Wilson: Since the Premier is in Collingwood today, I’m going to ask the Minister of Transportation about Highway 26.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member knows full well he’s not supposed to make that kind of reference, and I would ask him not to do it again. Carry on.

Mr. Jim Wilson: Okay, Speaker. By not completing the five-laning of Highway 26 at the east end of Collingwood, the province is holding up job creation and economic development. If this

section of highway was completed, the town could extend Sandford Fleming Drive to Highway 26, a move that would spur significant commercial development in the area.

This issue with the highway has been unresolved now for over a decade, and that’s totally unacceptable. I’ve written the minister on several occasions about this matter, but apparently common courtesy has gone out the window, because I can’t get a response.

This government has failed to do its job, so I ask: When will the minister commit to finishing this

section of Highway 26, and will he state when the work will take place?

Hon. Steven Del Duca: I thank the member opposite for his question. I think he and I have chatted about this, perhaps informally. I’m aware of the challenges around Highway 26 in the Collingwood area. In fact, I’ve had the opportunity to meet with the mayor and with municipal staff in the past regarding this particular stretch of highway.

I know that MTO has also been working closely with the municipality, and I understand the challenge, but it’s a challenge that goes beyond Collingwood. As that member may be aware, prior to 2003, for many, many years, there was chronic underinvestment in infrastructure in every corner of this province. That means that, since 2003—in particular, in the last four years—we are playing both catch-up and keep-up.

I’m happy to respond with additional information in the follow-up question, but I do appreciate the member’s advocacy.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Jim Wilson: I thank the minister, but the history of this was that, during our last two years in office, we started the realignment of Highway 26. Within a month of coming into office in 2003, you took the bulldozers off the highway. They remained off the highway for over a decade.

Finally, when Donna Cansfield came along, mainly because she had a place up in Collingwood, she put the bulldozers back on. You got most of the realignment done, but you failed to do the

section at the east end of Collingwood that goes into Collingwood. It doesn’t look very nice for tourists coming into the gateway to the Georgian Triangle.

There are a number of jobs held up—some 70 jobs, with various businesses—that want to move forward. Their properties are frozen right now by your ministry. They can’t move forward. It’s a bit of an eyesore. The council and mayor, as you know—Mr. Speaker, to the minister—are at wits’ end. There’s a culvert or a bridge that is falling down. Your ministry said, “Get some boards in there to prop it up.” It’s going to cave in. Someone’s going to get hurt. It’s unfinished—

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

Interjections.

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

Minister?

Hon. Steven Del Duca: I thank the member for the follow-up question. As I mentioned in my first answer, I’m aware of the challenge. The ministry will continue to work with that community. I have an expectation that, not only in Collingwood but in every corner of Ontario, we will continue to make sure that shovels are in the ground, that they stay in the ground and that we can keep building.

But it is interesting to note, from the heckles coming on the other side of the House, that there are members on that side who have literally been talking to me for close to three years to demand that we spend more—ironically, only in their ridings. Every single year for those three years, those members, including the one asking that question, have voted consistently against the budgets from this side of the House that are building this province up.

In just a few weeks, we’re sure the Minister of Finance will stand up and deliver another budget that will dedicate billions towards highway construction and expansions. I sincerely hope that member and his team finally support our budgets to build his communities up, as well as ours.

Interjection.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): The member from Niagara West–Glanbrook will come to order.

Interjections.

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

New question. The member from—

Interjections.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Stop the clock. I’m not going to entertain back-and-forths.

The member from Timmins–James Bay, new question.

Air ambulance service

Mr. Gilles Bisson: My question is to the Minister of Health. Minister, I was very surprised, on Friday, when I was up on the James Bay, to find out that we’re going to be shutting down the Ornge air ambulance helicopter base in Moosonee this summer. As you know, there’s new equipment that has been put in that base, as has been across this province. But for some reason, for the base in Moosonee, the only one that they’re doing this way, they’re going to be shutting down the base for two months this summer to take the helicopter away for maintenance. We’re not doing that anywhere else in the province, where we shut down bases when we do the maintenance on helicopters.

Why are we shutting down Moosonee, and will you help us turn that around?

Hon. Eric Hoskins: I greatly appreciate the member opposite raising this issue with me. I believe we had a similar situation a year ago, where there was the potential for a pause in the operations of an aspect of Ornge’s work in Moosonee, but we were able—quite frankly, with co-operation and collaboration with the member opposite—to come up with a solution that resulted in seamless and continuous Ornge operation and another model to address that.

So I’m not familiar with all of the details of what’s being proposed for this summer. I appreciate the fact that the member has raised it with us here in the Legislature. I will pursue more information and see if there is an opportunity to look at the required maintenance in a different way.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Mr. Gilles Bisson: Supplementary to the minister: Last year, Minister, the issue was that it was new equipment and we had to train the pilots. Obviously, you’ve got to train them before they can fly them, so we made accommodations in order to allow that to happen. Fair enough.

In this case, we’re maintaining the helicopter. Every so many hours, we have to do routine maintenance to make sure that those machines are safe to fly, for both the pilots and the crew, along with patients. My point is, if we’re not shutting down bases across Ontario—I’m not advocating that we should—why, then, are we allowing Ornge to shut down the Moosonee rotary wing base in order to maintain helicopters when we don’t do that anywhere else in the province? Can you please look at it and turn this around?

Hon. Eric Hoskins: Again, I appreciate the question. I know it is a different situation than it was last year—one was training; this is maintenance—but I referenced last year because I think that we were heading in a similar direction in terms of the potential or perceived disruption that would occur during that training period. I referenced it because I think that perhaps there might be an opportunity here.

I know that hospital officials have been consulted. I know that local officials have been consulted by Ornge with regard to this. I think we all agree that maintenance is certainly required. But I will look into this in more detail, speak to the member opposite and seek to provide the best possible solution that we can.

First responders

Ms. Sophie Kiwala: My question is for the Minister of Labour. One year ago today, first responders across Ontario celebrated as our government passed Bill 163, the Supporting Ontario’s First Responders Act. Since then, I have heard from firefighters, paramedics and police officers from Kingston and the Islands who have benefited from this piece of legislation.

In my riding, I know this increased level of support and heightened advocacy for mental health has had a significant impact in the lives of our community’s first responders and those who are closest to them. First responders help keep my community safe and are always there for us when we need them the most, and this legislation was a big step forward for Ontario to make sure that they get the help and resources they need right away.

Mr. Speaker, through you to the minister: What progress have we made this year since Bill 163 became law? And please give a round of applause for our first responders who are here with us today.

Hon. Kevin Daniel Flynn: I want to thank the member for that very important question and her own personal involvement in this issue. We know that mental health in the workplace is an issue that demands the attention of everyone: employers, employees, unions and the government.

When we passed Bill 163 in the House a year ago, we knew it was going to do something to help people in this province, because it provides a sense of security for those first responders and for their families. It ensures faster access to WSIB treatment and resources.

Speaker, I’m proud to stand in the House today and tell you that as a result of the actions of this House, more than 600 first responders have already been helped by the legislation in one year alone. That’s 600 men and women who have received quicker access to benefits and the services that they need to get better.

I visited with paramedics, Halton police and Oakville fire this morning. We should all be proud of what we did a year ago.

The Speaker (Hon. Dave Levac): Supplementary?

Ms. Sophie Kiwala: I’d like to thank the minister for his answer. I’m thrilled to hear that this legislation has also helped so many people across Ontario. I think we can all be extremely proud that these efforts are felt in every single community across this province.

It’s encouraging to know that individuals felt confident that they could come forward and that there would be help on the other end for them. I’ve spoken to Chief Charbonneau from the paramedics of Frontenac county about this, and he has been pleased with the measures that have been taken. It says a lot about the importance of eliminating the stigma around mental health and how our efforts in this area are working.

In the last year, first responders in my community have talked to me about the second part of Bill 163, which requires them to create PTSD prevention plans. I know they’ve been hard at work on these plans in my riding as well as across the province.

Can the minister please tell the House more about these efforts as the first responders in each of our communities are putting these plans together?

Hon. Kevin Daniel Flynn: Thanks again for that question from the member for Kingston and the Islands.

Unfortunately, the cure for PTSD continues to elude us, so we need to put a tremendous amount of effort into preventing PTSD in the first place.

When we passed the bill, we included in the legislation a requirement that all employers of first responders file their prevention plans with my ministry as of April 23 of this year. I’m looking forward to seeing those plans, seeing how we can highlight some of the best practices within those plans and sharing that information right throughout the province.

I want everyone to benefit from these plans, Speaker. I want everyone to submit the best plan they possibly could. That’s why I’ll be putting them online, posting them publicly. This is the next step in keeping our first responders in Ontario healthy and safe, giving them the dignity and the respect they deserve.

Thanks again to the House, particularly the member from Parkdale–High Park, for what she did to make us all work together on this.

Affordable housing

Mr. Ernie Hardeman: My question is to the Minister of Housing. Under this government, the waiting list for affordable housing has grown by 45,000 families. Every day we hear from people who are having trouble affording a place to live, yet this government is allowing money that was supposed to go to social housing to be wasted and misused, despite the fact that I’ve pointed it out repeatedly.

Social housing money at the Housing Services Corp. has gone to luxury vacations, bottles of wine, fancy dinners and many, many trips to Europe. In 2014, a provincial appointee who was supposed to provide oversight resigned after it was revealed he was billing the HSC thousands of dollars every month through his consulting firm, as well as getting paid to be chair of the board.

If this government is on top of the housing file, can they explain how they have failed to fill this provincial appointment after two years?

Hon. Chris Ballard: Cer